Division Bench Rules Motorcycle-Based Taxi Services Fall Within Motor Vehicles Act Framework, Invalidating State's Blanket Ban on Bike Taxis
In a landmark decision dated January 23, 2026, the Karnataka High Court’s Division Bench, comprising Chief Justice Vibhu Bakhru and Justice C M Joshi, has ruled in favor of technology aggregators and individual motorcycle owners seeking the right to operate bike taxi services. The judgment arose from a cluster of writ appeals challenging the State of Karnataka’s refusal to recognize motorcycles as transport vehicles eligible for contract carriage permits, thereby effectively banning bike taxi operations.
The appellants, including major aggregators such as Uber India Systems Pvt. Ltd., ANI Technologies Pvt. Ltd. (Ola), and Roppen Transportation Services Pvt. Ltd. (Rapido), along with individual motorcycle owners and the Bike Taxi Welfare Association, contended that motorcycles fall under the definition of ‘motor cabs’ and ‘contract carriage’ as per the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (MV Act). They argued that the State authorities unlawfully denied registration and permits for motorcycles to operate as taxis, infringing on their fundamental right to carry on business under Article 19(1)(g) of the Indian Constitution.
The State disputed this claim, relying on the absence of specific policy or rules permitting motorcycles as transport vehicles and citing concerns such as safety, congestion, and pollution. It also contended that the Karnataka On-Demand Transport Technology Aggregator Rules, 2016 (KODTTA Rules), under which aggregators are licensed, apply only to motor cabs, implicitly excluding motorcycles.
The Court undertook an exhaustive statutory interpretation exercise. It observed that under Section 2(27) of the MV Act, a motorcycle is a type of motor vehicle. The inclusive definition of 'contract carriage' under Section 2(7) and 'motor cab' under Section 2(25) encompasses vehicles adapted to carry passengers for hire or reward, which includes motorcycles carrying a pillion passenger. The Court noted the Central Government’s notification dated November 5, 2004, and the recent clarification dated January 22, 2024, explicitly recognizing motorcycles as eligible for registration as transport vehicles and contract carriages.
Further, the Court referred to the Motor Vehicles Aggregator Guidelines, 2025, which contemplate licenses for aggregators covering motorcycles as part of the fleet. It rejected the State’s argument that the KODTTA Rules exclude motorcycles from aggregation licenses, stating that the definition of ‘taxi’ includes motor cabs, under which motorcycles fall.
Critically, the Court held that the right to carry on the bike taxi business is a legitimate trade protected under Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution, subject only to reasonable restrictions in the interest of the general public under Article 19(6). It found no valid law or duly notified policy constituting a blanket ban on bike taxis in Karnataka. The expert committee report disapproving bike taxis in Bengaluru was not adopted as State policy, especially since the State had previously framed and later withdrawn an Electric Bike Taxi Scheme.
The Court emphasized that the State’s refusal to register motorcycles as transport vehicles or to issue contract carriage permits constituted an unreasonable restriction not backed by statutory rules or notifications. It underscored that the power of the State Government under Section 67 of the MV Act to control road transport is circumscribed and cannot be exercised to impose a blanket prohibition.
Accordingly, the Court set aside the impugned order of the Single Judge that upheld the ban, directing the State to consider and decide pending and future applications for registration of motorcycles as transport vehicles and grant contract carriage permits in accordance with law. The Regional Transport Authorities were authorized to impose reasonable conditions on permits to ensure safety and compliance.
Regarding aggregators, the Court clarified that they must obtain licenses under Section 93 of the MV Act and that such licenses include the operation of bike taxi services. Aggregators are required to disclose vehicle details and comply with conditions under the KODTTA Rules or Motor Vehicles Aggregator Guidelines, 2025.
This decision is expected to significantly impact urban mobility by legalizing bike taxi services in Karnataka, subject to regulatory compliance. It also provides clarity on the interplay between Central statutes and State policies concerning emerging mobility services.
Bottom Line:
Motorcycles can be registered as transport vehicles and operated as bike taxis under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 - A blanket ban on bike taxi services by the State Government without reasonable restrictions and statutory backing violates Article 19(1)(g) read with Article 19(6) of the Constitution of India.
Statutory provision(s): Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 Sections 2(7), 2(25), 2(27), 2(28), 2(47), 2(33), 2(35), 41, 66, 67, 73, 74, 80, 93; Karnataka On-Demand Transport Technology Aggregator Rules, 2016; Motor Vehicles Aggregator Guidelines, 2025; Central Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989; Motor Vehicles (Amendment) Act, 2019; Constitution of India Articles 19(1)(g), 19(6), 13(3)(a).
