•  •  Dark Mode

Your Interests & Preferences

I am a...

law firm lawyer
in-house company lawyer
litigation lawyer
law student
aspiring student
other

Website Look & Feel

 •  •  Dark Mode
Blog Layout

Save preferences
Subscribe for perks & to support LI

██████ ██████ home-grown practice head ██████ ██████ to set up funds formation at ██████

679 people have already read this article, which will unlock for non-subscribers like you in . So what are you waiting for? Subscribe now!

When Uber attacks: Challenges Delhi rules in HC with Rajiv Nayar as Ola faces another petition [UPDATE-1]

Taxi operator, under fire, fires back as Ola can’t seem to get a break.

The Delhi high court on Tuesday issued notice to the city government on a plea of app-based cab service provider Uber India which challenged the City Taxi Scheme 2015 claiming that the Delhi government had exceeded its jurisdiction.

A division bench of Chief Justice G Rohini and Justice Jayant Nath, seeking response from the Delhi government and asking it to file an affidavit within four weeks, posted the Uber plea for 23 November.

Uber claimed that the Delhi government had exceeded its authority. It said: “Under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1993, it is clear that the central government alone is authorised to frame rules applicable to All India Tourist Permit (AITP) vehicles.”

“The power to prescribe rules/regulations for AITP vehicles is exclusively vested with the central government and state governments cannot have a role in it. State government has no jurisdiction to frame rule for AITP, it can be framed by Centre only,” advocate Rajiv Nayar, appearing for Uber, told the court.

The City Taxi Scheme, 2015 was introduced on 26 August by the AAP government with added safety and other features.

“Uber is aggregators of AITP vehicles which are under the jurisdiction of the central government and radio taxi scheme does not govern the AITP vehicles and AITP vehicles do not fall under the jurisdiction of Delhi government,” said the Uber plea.

Advocate Prabhsahay Kaur argued that Uber India was not following the rules under the new scheme and was violating the ban orders.

“We asked them to comply with new scheme. We are also impounding taxis which are not complying with new scheme,” the counsel told the bench.

The Uber plea challenges the validity of the City Taxi Scheme, 2015, introduced to enforce ban orders against radio cabs.

The plea also sought direction for the Delhi government and police to desist from taking any coercive action against it including impounding of AITP vehicles associated with its technology platform.

Uber also sought direction from the court to the government for issue of licence to it to operate under the Motor Vehicle Act. The government had rejected Uber’s application seeking licence to operate in the national capital on grounds that it has not been complying with a ban imposed on it and other state rules.

The PTI reported yesterday that an association of taxi operators filed a fresh petition before the Delhi high court, submitting that rival operator Ola was violating the September high court order banning it from offering Diesel-fuelled taxis in Delhi through a technological sleight-of-hand.

Click to show 5 comments
at your own risk
(alt+c)
By reading the comments you agree that they are the (often anonymous) personal views and opinions of readers, which may be biased and unreliable, and for which Legally India therefore has no liability. If you believe a comment is inappropriate, please click 'Report to LI' below the comment and we will review it as soon as practicable.