The Supreme Court in the case Roppen Transportation Services Pvt Ltd v. Union of India AndOrs observed and has held that when the State formulates rules in pursuance of its power under Section 96 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, thus, it may also bear the guidelines which are framed by the Union Government in 2020 (Motor Vehicle Aggregators Guidelines, 2020).
The court observed in the order passed by the Apex Court in the plea filed by Rapido’s against the Maharashtra government for refusal for granting two-wheeler bike taxi aggregator license to the company.
The bench comprising of Chief Justice DY Chandrachud, Justice PS Narasimha, and Justice JB Pardiwala passed the said order. It has also been declined by the court to entertain the plea of Rapido’s and has asked to pursue alternative remedy before the Bombay High Court.
The court stated that the State of Maharashtra may keep in mind the guidelines of the Centre while making rules on an aggregator license. It has been provided under Chapter V of the Indian Motor Vehicles Act the provisions to control transports. It has been stated under Section 93(1) of the Act, dealing with the issuance of the licenses to aggregators. The first provision of the said section states that the while issuing a license, the State Government may follow guidelines which is issued by the Central Government.
The court in its order stated that the State Government should also bear in mind the Guidelines which have been framed by the Union Government in 2020, when the State Government formulates rules in pursuance of its power conferred under Section 96 of the Motor Vehicles Act.
Adding to it, the court stated that the guidelines issued by the Central Government in 2020 are only of persuasive value and are not being mandatory. Therefore, the ultimate decision on granting of a license and for formulating the said rules lies with the State Government, who may be considering the Guidelines while making their decision.
