The High Court of Karnataka, on October 13, directed the State Government meet taxi aggregators in the afternoon to explore the possibility of reaching a consensus on the rate to be charged for offering autorickshaw services through their apps after the Advocate General accepted the court’s suggestion to discuss contentious issues with the aggregators.
Justice M.G.S. Kamal issued the directions on October 13 while adjourning further hearing till October 14 on the petitions filed by ANI Technologies Pvt Ltd, which offers taxi aggregator service through Ola app, and Uber India Technologies Pvt. Ltd. The petitioners have questioned the Transport Department’s order to stop offering services of autorickshaws on their apps.
Both petitioners have questioned the legality of the claim of the State Government that the Karnataka On-Demand Transportation Technology Aggregators Rules, 2016 permit offering of only cars through their apps, and not autorickshaws.
On charging rates higher than that permissible for regular autorickshaws, the petitioners have contended that they have a right to collect service charges for offering value-added services, both to the public and the taxi operators while arguing that there is no restriction in the rules on charges.
To a query by the court, Ola’s advocate Aditya Sondhi argued that the company is charging ₹19 as service charge for autorickshaw service in addition to the amount that is paid to the driver, while the service charge for cars depend on the type of the car availed by the customer.
No coercive action
Senior Advocate C.K. Nanda Kumar, appearing for Uber, has contended that the action initiated by the Karnataka Government is contrary to the direction issued by the division bench of the High Court in December 2016 asking the government not to take any coercive action against the petitioner aggregators for violation of the rules while the appeals are awaiting adjudication on validity of the rules.
It was pointed out to the court that both aggregators had obtained licences under the rules, validity of which is being challenged, in 2016, and both had applied for renewal of licence in 2021, which is pending before transport authorities.
Both petitioners have contended that autorickshaw is included under the definition of ‘taxi’ under the rules as it means ‘a motor cab having a seating capacity not exceeding six passengers, excluding the driver, with public service permit on contract’.
Meanwhile, Advocate-General Prabhuling K. Navadgi, citing the proceedings of the meeting with aggregators, argued that they had admitted in the meeting that they cannot offer autorickshaw services on their platform.
However, the petitioners pointed out that the proceedings of the meeting do not contain signatures of the representatives of the petitioners.
