Karnataka HC lifts ban on bike taxis, clears path for Ola, Uber & Rapido

The Karnataka High Court on Friday lifted the ban on bike taxi services in the state, setting aside an April 2025 order that had halted their operations. A Division Bench of Chief Justice Vibhu Bakhru and Justice C M Joshi allowed appeals filed by cab aggregators ANI Technologies (Ola), Uber and Rapido, along with individual bike taxi drivers and the Bike Taxi Welfare Association.

The Bench quashed the single-judge order that had imposed a blanket ban on bike taxis until the State framed specific rules, holding that such a prohibition was unreasonable and violated the right to trade.

The court ruled that motorcycles used as bike taxis fall within the definition of "transport vehicles" under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. As a result, the State government cannot refuse or deny permits solely on the ground that motorcycles are not transport vehicles.

"A blanket prohibition on issuing contract carriage permits to motorcycles cannot be considered a reasonable restriction under Article 19(6) of the Constitution," the judgment said, adding that the ban was contrary to the scheme of the Motor Vehicles Act.

The court also noted that while the State described the issue as a policy matter, it had failed to set out any concrete grounds to justify a blanket ban in the interest of the general public.

The Bench clarified that bike taxi operators must obtain proper permissions and can apply for contract carriage permits to operate motorcycles as bike taxis. While authorities are free to examine relevant aspects of such applications, permits cannot be rejected merely because the vehicle is a motorcycle.

The regional transport authority may impose conditions in accordance with the law, the court said, adding that aggregators are also free to file fresh applications, which must be considered as per legal provisions.

The ban was originally ordered on April 2, 2025, by a single-judge Bench of Justice B Shyam Prasad, which directed bike taxi services to be halted within six weeks, citing the absence of a regulatory framework. The deadline was later extended after operators sought relief and filed appeals.

During the hearings, the Division Bench repeatedly questioned the State on delays in framing rules to regulate bike taxi services and indicated that the ban would be lifted if such rules were not promptly introduced.

In its verdict, the court also observed that the existing regulatory framework governing taxis requires reconsideration and suitable amendments to address bike taxi operations.
(With Bar&Bench inputs)