MillenniumPost
Delhi

Will come up with rules on radio taxis in 10 days: AAP

The AAP government on Tuesday informed the Delhi high court that it will come up with specific guidelines within 10 days regarding <g data-gr-id="22">plying</g> of radio taxis in the national Capital including safety norms for women and other passengers.

A Bench of Chief Justice G Rohini and Justice Jayant Nath was further told that the Delhi government has modified its earlier Radio Taxi Scheme, making specific guidelines for their operation, which include mandatory installation of GPS devices, a panic button and providing full database of their drivers to city police.

“We (AAP government) are coming with <g data-gr-id="28">modified</g> scheme. We have a holistic approach. Our schemes will have norms related to <g data-gr-id="27">safety</g> of the women and the public at large,” Additional Standing Counsel Naushad Ahmed Khan, who was appearing for Delhi government, said. He further said that the same will be done in a week or 10 days.

According to the new rules, radio taxi providers will have to either maintain a call centre or operate through an authorised call centre or web portal and they will have to provide such details to the transport department, he added.

The counsel further submitted that the new rules will be applicable to all cabs plying in the national capital.

The government’s response came after the High Court in December last year had asked them to reply on a PIL filed by advocate Sanjeev Beniwal, alleging that the number of taxi operators like Uber, Ola, Taxi for Sure and Meru have been violating the Supreme Court directive by using diesel-fuelled vehicles as city or radio taxis. The court was also told that the Delhi government is taking action against taxi drivers found violating the ban imposed on <g data-gr-id="31">unauthorised</g> operation of radio taxis. 
It further said that the new schemes will take care of the issue of the <g data-gr-id="29">plying</g> of the diesel-powered inter-state taxis in the city, which is violating the Supreme Court directive. 
Next Story
Share it