Back
2023 Supreme(SC) 578
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
ANIRUDDHA BOSE, RAJESH BINDAL, JJ.
Government Of NCT Of Delhi & Ors. - Appellants
Versus
Roppen Transportation Services Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. - Respondents
Civil Appeal No.4039 of 2023 (Arising out of SLP(Civil) No.12000 of 2023) With
Civil Appeal No.4040 of 2023 (Arising out of SLP(Civil) No.12046 of 2023)
Decided on : 12-06-2023
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : Mr. Manish Vashisht, Sr.Adv., Ms. Jyoti Mendiratta, AOR, Mr. Samir Vashisht, Adv./ASC Civil GNCTD, Mr. Rikky Guptaa,Adv., Mr. Aman Singh Bhadoria, Adv., Mr. Vanshay Kaul, Adv., Mr. Ravindra Pal Singh,Adv., Mr. Vedansh Vashisht,Adv.,
Mr. Aviral Tripathi,Adv.
For the Respondent: Mr. Siddharth Bhatnagar, Sr. Adv., Mr. Hardeep Sachdeva, Adv, Mr. Abhishek Awasthi, Adv., Mr. Kamal Shankar, Adv., Mr. Parag Maini, Adv., Mr. Raghav Chadha, Adv., Ms. Nishtha Kumar, AOR, Mr. Abhyudai Singh, Adv., Mr. Kshitiz Rao, Adv., Mr. Neeraj Kishan Kaul, Sr. Adv., Mr. Mahesh Agarwal, Adv., Mr. Rishi Agrawala, Adv., Mr. Manu Krishnan, Adv., Mr. Pranjit Bhattacharya, Adv., Ms. Madhavi Agarwal, Adv., Mr. Toshiv Goyal, Adv., Ms. Ira Mahajan, Adv., Mr. E. C. Agrawala, AOR, Mr. Sanjay Jain, Mr. Gurmeet Singh Makker, AOR, Mr. Siddantha Dharamadhikari, Adv., Mr. Padmesh Mishra, Adv., Mr. Arkaj Kumar, Adv., Mr. Sumit Jidani,Adv., Mr. Anoop Bose, Adv., Ms. Nishta Kumar,AOR
IMPORTANT POINT
Plying of two-wheelers for carrying passengers under a regime operated through aggregators – Interim orders ought not to have been passed staying whole scale operation of a statutory regime till finalisation of policy – Solely on consideration of balance of convenience, such interim stay on a public notice ought not to have been granted.
Headnote:
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 – Sections 92 and 93 – Permission for plying of two-wheelers for carrying passengers under a regime operated through aggregators – Appeal against – Interim orders ought not to have been passed staying whole scale operation of a statutory regime till finalisation of policy – Solely on consideration of balance of convenience, such interim stay on a public notice ought not to have been granted – Permanent stay directed on operation of impugned orders passed by Delhi High Court which were interim in nature – Parties given liberty to apply before High Court for early hearing of Writ Petitions. (Paras 22 and 23)
Facts of the case:
Appellants in both these appeals are Government of NCT of Delhi and their own transport department and Commissioner of that department. They assail two interim orders, both dated 26th May 2023 passed by High Court of Delhi at New Delhi. These orders, in effect permit plying of two-wheelers for carrying passengers under a regime operated through aggregators.
Findings of Court:
Parties are given liberty to apply before High Court for early hearing of Writ Petitions. On formulation of Policy, each application for licence/permit in respect of two-wheelers to be operated through regime of aggregators, shall be dealt with expeditiously in a time-bound manner.
Result : Directions issued.
ORDER :
Leave granted.
2. The appellants in both these appeals before us are Government of NCT of Delhi and their own transport department and the Commissioner of that department. They assail two interim orders, both dated 26th May 2023 passed by the High Court of Delhi at New Delhi before us. These orders, in effect permit plying of two-wheelers for carrying passengers under a regime operated through aggregators.
3. In the appeal arising out of SLP(C) No. 12000 of 2023, the respondents are Roppen Transportation Services Pvt. Ltd., and one of their officers, who were the writ petitioners before the High Court. The order impugned in this appeal reads:
"1. Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
2. The application is accordingly disposed of.
3. Notice issued.
4. Learned Additional Standing Counsel accepts notice on behalf of the respondents and seeks time to file counter affidavit.
5. Let needful be done within six weeks from today with an advance copy to the other side.
6. Rejoinder thereto, if any, be filed within four weeks thereafter.
7. Renotify on 22.08.2023 before Registrar for completion of pleadings.
8. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that policy is under active consideration. Accordingly, we hereby stay the notice and make it clear that the stay shall operate till the final policy if notified. However, once the final policy is notified, if the petitioners are still aggrieved, they are at liberty to take steps before the appropriate forum."
4. In the other appeal, the respondents-writ petitioners are Uber India Systems Pvt. Ltd., one of their Directors and another corporate entity who appear to be an associate of the former. The order of the Division Bench in this appeal is:
"1. Present petition has come on transfer.
2. Counter affidavit filed by the respondents is lying objection as it has been filed after the time granted by this Court.
3. Registry is directed to place the same on record.
4. Rejoinder thereto, if any, be filed within four weeks.
5. Renotify on 22.08.2023 before Registrar for completion of pleadings.
6. Till further orders, no coercive steps shall be taken against the petitioners."
5. On 19th February 2023, the Government of NCT of Delhi (henceforth, who shall be described as the appellant) had issued a Public Notice, prohibiting use of two-wheelers by the aggregators, which description fits the respondents/writ petitioners in both these proceedings. The Public Notice specified:
"GOVERNMENT OF NATIONAL CAPITAL TERRITORY OF DELHI TRANSPORT DEPARTMENT
5/9, UNDER HILL ROAD, DELHI 110054
PUBLIC NOTICE
USE OF TWO-WHEELED VEHICLES FOR CARRYING PASSENGERS ON HIRE OR REWARD
It has been brought to the notice that two-wheelers having Non-Transport (Private) registration mark/number are being used to carry passengers on hire or reward which is purely commercial operation and in violation of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 and rules made thereunder.
The above said violation is a contravention of the registration condition of the vehicle which is punishable under Section 192 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 having punishment for the first offence up to Rs.5000/, and for a second or subsequent offence with imprisonment which may extend to one year with fine up to Rs.10,000/ beside impounding of the vehicle.
In addition to the above punishment, the driving licence of the driver will be suspended for a minimum period of three months under the direction of the Hon’ble Supreme Court committee.
Further, it is also noticed that some digital platforms are facilitating such operations by offering booking through an app thereby engaging themselves as an aggregator in contravention of the provision of Section 93, and shall be punishable with a fine up to one lakh rupees under Section 193 (2) of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.
Accordingly, it is directed to immediately stop such kind of activities to avoid prosecution and penalty, etc.
Sd
Special Commissioner, Transport"
6. The respondents-writ petitioners approached the Delhi High Court invoking its co
