Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

3. In the present case, the dispute concerns bike taxi services in which bikes can be hired to provide taxi services between points [bike taxi service].

4. The appellant in W.A.No.848/2025, Uber India Systems Pvt. Ltd. [Uber]; the appellant in W.A.No.906/2025, M/s. ANI Technologies Pvt. Ltd. [Ola]; and the appellant in W.A.No.948/2025, M/s. Roppen Transportation Services Pvt., Ltd. [Rapido], are technology companies operating platforms for aggregating taxi services. The said appellants are collectively . Report on Efficient and Sustainable Transport in Bengaluru and Bike Taxis prepared by the expert committee furnished to the Government of Karnataka on 29.04.2019 pursuant to the order dated 20.09.2018.

- 14 -

AND 2 OTHERS referred to as the Aggregators. The appellant in W.A.No.962/2025 is an association of individuals who own motorcycles and operate them as taxis [bike taxis]. The appellants in W.A.No.863/2025 are individuals who own motorcycles and were operating, or propose to operate, bike taxis.

5. Uber holds a license under the Karnataka On-Demand Transport Technology Aggregator Rules 2016 [KODTTA Rules] to operate as an aggregator, which connects intending passengers with the driver of a motor cab through telephone calls, internet- based services, or GPS-based services. Uber had applied for the renewal of the licence, which, at the material time, was pending. Uber, as an aggregator, had also made separate representations to operate motorcycles as taxis and to obtain the necessary registrations and permits. Similarly, Rapido is also an aggregator of bike taxi services and operates a website and a mobile application. Rapido had also made various representations, setting out the issues faced in operating the services due to threats from the Association of Owners of auto-rickshaws and the local police. Rapido's application for permission to operate as an aggregator of bike taxi services was rejected by the Government of Karnataka, as

6. In W.P.No.6421/2022(MV), Uber has sought for the following reliefs:

"1. Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the Respondent No.1 to consider the Application dated 19 February 2022 ('Annexure A') made by the Petitioner.

2. Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the Respondent No.2 to permit the registration of motorcycles as transport vehicles.

16. Shri Udaya Holla, learned Senior Advocate, advanced arguments on behalf of Shri Nishanth A.V, learned counsel for the appellants in W.A.No.948/2025 / Rapido.

17. Shri K. Arun Kumar, learned Senior Advocate, advanced arguments on behalf of Shri Faisal Sherwani and Shri Aditya Vikram, learned counsel for the appellants in W.A.No.906/2025 / Ola.

18. Shri V. Srinivasan Raghavan, learned Senior Advocate, advanced arguments on behalf of Ms Anupama G. Hebbar, Shri Sankeerth Vittal, Ms Bhavna Menon, Ms Dharshini S and Shri Abdul Hadin, learned counsel for the appellants in W.A.No.848/2025 / Uber.