Issues
Auto stands/Taxi ranks

Adequate number of designated and authorised autorickshaw and taxi stands/ranks has been a longstanding demand of drivers. Let us look at the current situation as it exists and whether their demand is justified.
Autorickshaw stands
Delhi has 402 designated halt-and-go spots for auto-rickshaws notified by Delhi traffic police in 2009 in response to a public interest litigation initiated by Rakesh Agarwal, the president of Chaalak Shakti, in his personal capacity at that time.
The notification stipulates that maximum 5 autorickshaws can park at a spot. Therefore. the total capacity of these stands is 2010 against approximately 95,000 autorickshaws on the road in Delhi, thereby providing less than 2% of the number of autorickshaws in Delhi to halt and wait for passengers, or to pick them up or set them down.
Of these, only about half have been signposted. The rest are on paper and in papers. Neither the drivers nor the passengers know about the existence of these stands. Since enforcement authorities are equally ignorant, they often issue challans to autorickshaws for parking at or near these unmarked but authorised stands.
Apart from signposting, there are no other road markings for the benefit of autorickshaw drivers. No care or consideration is given to road design or ongoing traffic. Even basic infrastructure is missing
You may have seen thousands of autorickshaw stands in Delhi other than these 402. Well, they are illegal and prone to challaning or settling regular rent with police and other authorities.
In July 2019, Delhi Government had notified a further 511 spots as autorickshaw stands. It had claimed that all of them will be GPS enabled and can be tracked on smartphones. However, in reply to an RTI application, the transport department officials have feigned ignorance. There is nothing on the ground that any autorickshaw drivers has ever seen or is aware of, let alone a geo-tagged stand that can be tracked on a smartphone.
Taxi stands/ranks
The total number of taxi stands notified by Delhi Traffic Police is 517 including those at the airport, railway stations, and bus stations (ISBTs). These were notified back in the 1990s and early part of this century.
Since white taxes operating under aggregators were not around and the tourist taxis were few and far between, the stands were meant to serve only black and yellow taxis.
These stands have been turned into residential accommodation by the owners of black and yellow taxis. Contrary to the original ill-conceived plan, these stands have installed electricity connection, water connection, constructed offices and have, over a period, listed numerous tourist taxis, private number taxis and other vehicles.
These stands have essentially become the property of owners of original black and yellow taxis. Nobody from the outside is allowed to use these stands.
This is not how a taxi stand should be. In any case, the number is wholly inadequate for vehicles holding various permits such as for black and yellow taxis, white city taxis. tourist taxis. Apart from this number, many taxis registered in UP, Haryana and other states do their business majorly in Delhi.
Solution
Legally speaking, autorickshaw and taxi stands are required to be notified by Delhi government and constructed by civic agencies such as MCD, NDMC, Delhi Cantonment Board and development agencies such as DDA, and Delhi Government itself. None of them has either notified or constructed what is an essential feature of an urban settlement in any country.
An autorickshaw and a taxi occupy approximately the same amount of space when parked. Therefore, it makes sense to have common stands for both types of vehicles at most places.
The stands themselves should be of three types:
1. Halt & Go
It is a globally tested concept but lacks in proper execution in Delhi. This should be implemented in busy areas where there is a constant stream of both drivers and passengers. Autos and taxis must move in a “Lane” and operate on FIFA – First In First Out – basis but a driver must be permitted to refuse if the distance is greater than, say, 8 kms in the case of auto and 12 kms in the case of taxi.
2. Choose & Go
At these ranks, the vehicles will park themselves in “Bays” parallel to each other and will, optionally, display their chosen direction or destination. Vehicles may also display a “No Go” sign during the resting period. The driver may be given the liberty to choose his destination at the end of his workday or the time when he doesn’t want to ply for any reason. It causes no harm to anyone. When no chosen destination is displayed, the driver should be bound to accept every fare within the 8 and 12 km range for auto and taxi respectively.
3. Vishram & Go

Given that more than half of the autos and taxis need to be parked somewhere during the off-peak hours for a prolonged period and for drivers to use the opportunity to rest their limbs, the government should construct Terminals in the form of a large parking area together with a decently furnished Hall where minimum 100 vehicles can be parked and their drivers can take rest. As drivers get ready to go, they place their vehicle in a Lane and go into “HALT & GO” mode. The Hall should have facilities for resting, refreshments, watching television and other such amenities.
Freedom of fare

Price control
Legally and traditionally, fare for autorickshaws and taxis is fixed by the government in major cities. It is a kind of “price control” that the government practices on a totally private sector, ostensibly to promote a competitive environment and safeguard the interests of passengers.
Nothing could be more hypocritical of the government. Passengers are consumers who need as much or as little protection as the consumers of any other goods and services. Every reasoning given by the government in favour of price control on this count fails to hold much water. The practice of “negotiated fare” between the driver and passengers as opposed to the government-mandated-fare is the norm rather than the exception.
For every other product, it is the seller who decides the price. But auto and taxi drivers are treated differently. Why?
As for as competitive environment is concerned, it is a function and the responsibility of market forces.
Worldwide phenomenon
Price control is practised worldwide for as long as one can remember. This tradition must go and India should take the lead in the abolition of price control in autorickshaws and taxis.
Managing initial chaos
We are not unmindful of initial chaos that free-for-all fare regime may cause. Both passengers and drivers may be exploited. There may be instances of very high fare when one needs a ride most.
Such issues can be tackled by the unions or cooperatives of drivers such as Chaalak Shakti, or lightly regulated aggregators such as Ola, Uber and Rapido. True competition will emerge automatically and ensure a fair deal for all stakeholders.
Drivers who wish to ply individually free from aggregation of any form may be given upto three slabs to choose from at any given point in time. The slabs themselves can be decided by the government in consultation with the unions.
Wonders of technology
Free fare can be implemented and its efficacy monitored through the use of technology and GPS devices already installed in the vehicles. A passenger using the mobile device to hail a ride or resorting to street-hail will easily know what deal he is getting for what vehicle.
Wonders of a free market combined with technology!
E-Auto Scheme
The Supreme Court of India had imposed a restriction in 1997 on the number of autorickshaws that can ply in Delhi. The limit was twice relaxed. Today, it stands 1,00,000.

Introduction of e-autos is praiseworthy
Approximately 95 thousand autorickshaws are already on road with the concurrence of the Supreme Court of India. The Delhi government decided to allot 4,261 battery operated autorickshaws (e-auto) including one third of these, i.e., 1,406 vehicles, to the women.
We, as a union responsive to society, fully support the introduction of e-autos in order to reduce urban air pollution. We are also in favour of ever-increasing participation of women in the economic activity of the city-state.
E-auto scheme fails
However, with only 269 e-autos registered by 09.06.2022, the scheme of e-autos has failed miserably and massively. The government had set 30.04.2022 as the last date for registration. This date was subsequently extended to 31.07.2022.
We list below some of the reasons for this failure:
1. Opening scheme to entire Delhi was wrong

The allotment of e-auto should have been restricted to genuine autorickshaw drivers who can be easily identified if they hold a Badge. Instead, the scheme was thrown open to every resident of Delhi who has an Aadhar number and a driving license for a car. This made more than half of Delhi’s population of 2 crore eligible for the allotment of the e-auto. Almost every doctor, every lawyer, every industrialist, every MLA/minister or any person regardless of one’s profession became eligible. The process was made so quick and easy and without any cost or commitment that more than 90% of the applicants were non-serious people. They forgot about their applications immediately. It played havoc with the livelihood of genuine auto drivers who have been waiting for decades to become owners of autorickshaws which are in limited supply.
2. Legal process not followed
The entire process right from the beginning up to final vehicle registration should have been in public eye through public notices at various stages such as invitation including all terms and conditions, notice of draw of lots, opportunity to witness draw of lots, details about various vehicles and financing options in the market, etc. No such process was followed which is not only illegal but reeks of corruption on account of secrecy and opacity.
3. Delhi government scheme to promote finance mafia
The government had nominated a private company called CESL in order to facilitate the purchase, financing and interest subvention (subsidy) of 5%. This company should have tied up with all dealers of all vehicles, created a marketplace for all kinds of financiers including banks, and gone into a heavy duty awareness campaign. Instead, the company tied up with only 3 vehicles makes, 4 financiers who charge interest like loan-sharks and no awareness campaign was conceived or run. No wonder, the government chosen CESL had a major hand in the scheme’s failure.
4. Lack of awareness vs. political promotion
The government ought to have carried advertisements, making people aware of the benefits of e-autos and full details of the availability of charging infrastructure. However, the government chose to publish multiple full page political advertisements with beaming mugshot of the chief minister costing crores of rupees and serving no useful purpose. Similarly, advertisements on thousands of autos costing huge amount of money promoted the chief minister more than the e-autos.


The right decision to take for the government would be to now halt the e-auto scheme as it is and start the whole process afresh while it is accompanied by a high-pitched awareness campaign and facilitation of creation of charging infrastructure.
5. Free market is good
Our union wants the market forces to decide the number of autos rather than an artificial court mandate which pushes up the cost of vehicles in the grey market to the detriment of the community of drivers. Throwing open the market may have short term adverse consequences but it will be good for everybody’s interest in the long run including the passengers when the dust settles down.
Uniform
A uniform is stipulated for auto and taxi driver. However, there are multiple issues with this requirement. The laws are contradictory and void for vagueness. Reply to an RTI application on this count was laughable, to say the list.
1. Contradictory laws
Permit conditions for these vehicles framed by the transport authorities stipulate that colour of the uniform shall be GREY, whereas Delhi Motor Vehicle Rules, 1993 passed by the legislature prescribed that the uniform shall be KHAKHI.

2. Shade not specified
Regardless of the colour, the required shade has neither been pinpointed for grey nor for khaki. Both these colours come in dozens of prominent shades. Anything containing 1% black and 99% white, or vice a versa, is grey. Will that be acceptable to the authorities, even though it is in full compliance of the law?

3. “Uniform” not defined
It is not mentioned anywhere in the rules or the permit conditions what constitute a “Uniform” – whether it is a safari-suit, or a pant-shirt, or dhoti-kurta or an underwear and a banian which is comfortable for summers.

4. Trimmings and accessories not specified
In response to an RTI application, the transport authority has stated that no information exists as to the trimming and accessories that go with the uniform such as shoes, belt, epaulette etc. One will not find the same authority wanting though when it comes to issuing traffic tickets.
5. Freedom of expression through clothes suppressed
Clothes are an extension of one’s personality. One chooses them to express his individuality and exercise his freedom of expression. Straightjacketing a person in a uniform for almost 10-12 hours a day, almost 7 days of week amounts to suppression of one’s freedom. Unlike the police, army or doctors in government hospitals, drivers are not government employees that they can be bound to such a stipulation. No purpose is served by making drivers wear uniform.
Case in Delhi High Court
In this context, Chaalak Shakti has filed a writ petition in Delhi high court questioning the law regarding uniforms. It is titled as WP(C) 6811/2021, Chaalak Shakti & Ors. Vs. GNCTD & Ors. We have told the court that while life-threatening offences like speeding carry meagre penalty, the fine for not wearing a uniform ranges from ₹10,000 to ₹20,000.
In its reply, the government has admitted to this contradiction and has promised to amend the DMVR. The matter is likely to be finally heard and decided on 13-07-2022.
