Ola and Uber move court questioning the October 11 order of the Transport Department; Court says that the government has to take care of the interests of all stakeholders
Ola and Uber move court questioning the October 11 order of the Transport Department; Court says that the government has to take care of the interests of all stakeholders
The Karnataka High Court on Thursday directed the state government to continue with autorickshaws under app-based services and hold another round of talks with app-based transport aggregators on issues related to fares and service charges. collected for such operations.
Observing that the state government has to take care of the interests of the general public, app-based aggregators and vehicle operators serving through aggregators, the court said it will continue to hear the petitions filed by the two aggregators on Friday. Based on the outcome of the negotiations.
attempt to reach a consensus
Justice MGS Kamal issued the directions after the state advocate general accepted the court’s suggestion to hold another round of meeting (on Thursday afternoon) with the aggregators, “on controversial grounds, perhaps on ad hoc basis, to reach a consensus”. try. issues”.
The bench was hearing the petitions filed by ANI Technologies Pvt Ltd. Ltd., which is offering taxi aggregator service through Ola App, and Uber India Services Pvt. Ltd., which is providing services under the Uber app.
The petitioners have questioned the transport department’s October 11 order directing them to stop offering auto services on their app and not charge fares exceeding the fares fixed by the government under the Motor Vehicles Act.
Both the petitioners-aggregators have questioned the validity of the government’s claim that the Karnataka On-Demand Transportation Technology Aggregators Rules, 2016, permits the offering of cars only through its app and not autorickshaws.
more rent?
Denying the allegation that they are charging more fare than permitted under the law, the petitioners have stated that they are legally collecting 5% GST on the fare amount (collected on behalf of the drivers) and 18% GST on the service. Huh. Customers are charged for convenience, comfort and safety transportation, which are all value-added services to the customers.
There is no bar in the rules for levying service charges, he has argued, arguing that it is for the government to reform the law if there is any ambiguity.
To a question of the court, the advocates of the petitioners have stated that they charge service charges from the customer on the basis of the fare charged for the class of vehicle booked by the customer.
The petitioners have stated that they had obtained the license in 2016 under the rules, the validity of which is subject to challenge before the High Court, and that they had applied for renewal of their license in 2021, which is still pending before the transport authorities. .
definition of taxi
An autorickshaw is included under the definition of “taxi” under the 2016 Rules as it states that “taxi means a motor cab with a seating capacity of not more than six passengers, excluding the driver of the public on contract”. Service is a permit,” the petitioner claimed while denying the government. They claim that autorickshaw services cannot be offered through app-based aggregators.
Meanwhile, AG Prabhuling K. Navadgi, referring to the proceedings of the meeting with the aggregators, argued that one of them had admitted in the meeting that they cannot offer autorickshaw services on their platform. However, it was argued on behalf of the petitioners that they were not signatories to the proceedings.
meeting was held
Following the High Court’s direction to the state government to meet taxi aggregators and explore the possibility of reaching a consensus on the rate to be charged for offering autorickshaw services through their app, a meeting was convened by the transport department Was.
In the meeting chaired by the Principal Secretary Transport Department, the representatives of taxi aggregators gave their inputs which were recorded. Transport department officials said the inputs will be included in a report, which will be presented before the high court on Friday, without specifying whether a consensus has been reached on the matter.