Holding

The Court held that the Delhi Administration must publicise licence applications, apply reasonable and relevant criteria for selection, extend the Amritsar scheme to non‑owner rickshaw pullers, and must not impose an arbitrary ceiling on the total number of cycle rickshaws.

Summary

The Supreme Court examined the Delhi Municipal Corporation's Cycle Rickshaw Bye‑Law (1960, amended 1976) which required that only owners of a cycle rickshaw could obtain a licence to ply for hire. Petitioners challenged this provision, arguing that the criteria for granting licences were arbitrary and that a ceiling on the total number of rickshaws could unfairly exclude applicants. Referring to the earlier Amritsar scheme (Azad Rickshaw Pullers Union v. State of Punjab), the Court directed the Delhi Administration to publicise all licence applications, assess them on reasonable and relevant criteria—including length of service—and to extend the same facilities provided in the Amritsar order to non‑owner applicants. The Court also warned that any arbitrary ceiling on the number of rickshaws would be open to challenge. Accordingly, the Court disposed of the writ petitions, allowing the petitioners to continue plying their rickshaws until fresh licences are issued under the new scheme.

Issues considered

Whether the requirement that only owners of a cycle rickshaw may obtain a licence under the Delhi Cycle Rickshaw Bye‑Law is constitutionally valid.
Whether the Delhi Administration's criteria and any ceiling on the total number of cycle rickshaws are reasonable, non‑arbitrary, and compliant with Article 32 of the Constitution.
Whether the scheme adopted in the Amritsar case can be extended to Delhi for granting licences to non‑owner rickshaw pullers.

Legislation cited

Constitution of Indias. Article 226, s. Article 32
Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, 1957s. 481

Subjects

Cycle rickshawLicenceMunicipal bye‑lawOwnership requirementReasonable criteriaAdministrative lawArticle 32Delhi Municipal Corporation

Judgment

·'

I 373

A
NANHU & ORS. ETC.
v.
DELHI ADMINISTRATION & ORS. '
August 5, 1980 B
(V. R. KRISHNA IYER, R. S. PATHAK AND 0. CIDNNAPPA REDDY, JJ.)

Cycle-Rickshaw Bye-Law 1960-Bye-Law 3(1) Cycle Rickshaw Drivers--
<Court Framing Scheme.
The Delhi Municipal Corporation which framed the Cycle Rickshaw Bye-
!Law of 1960 under section 481 of the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, 1957 c
·amended Bye-law 3 in 1976 to provide that 'no person shall keep or ply for
hire a cycle rickshaw in Delhi unless he himself is the owner thereof and
holds a licence granted in that behalf'.
In writ petitions challenging the provision :
HELD:
. In Azad Rickshaw Pullers Union Amritsar & Others v. State of Punjab & D
Others, [1981] 1 SCR 366 a scheme had been worked out to help the rickshaw
·pliers of Amritsar Municipality to become owners of cycle rickshaws. [174 A-Bl
2. The Delhi Administration will effectively publicize and notify applications
for licences for plying of cycle rickshaws and all those who apply will be consi-
dered. on their merits including length of service as cycle rickshaw pliers. The
-'( criteria that the Delhi Administration will adopt must be reasonable and relevant. E
'[374 D]
3. On the basis of reasonable criteria the Delhi Administration will direct
the concerned Municipal authorities to grant licences for plying rickshaws and
if the applicants so chosen are not owners themselves all the facilities indic2ted
in the Amritsar order will be extended to such cycle rickshaw pliers fixing
·reasonable time limits. [374 F] ·
F
ORIGINAL JURISDICTION : Writ Petition Nos. 841 and 728/1980.
(Under Article 32 of the Constitution.)
R. S. Sharma and S. M. Ashri for the Petitioner in WP Nos ..841
and 728/80. · '
G
~ K. Parasaran, Sol. Genl. B. "f>. Maheshwari and Suresh Seth for the
'RR in WP Nos. 841 and 728.
Th~ Judgment of the Court was delivered by

KRISHNA IYER, J.-We have disposed of today applications from
-cycle rickshaw pliers of Amritsar Municipality where a scheme has H
'been worked out to help them become owners of cycle rickshaws. A
.374 SUPREME COURT REPORTS llCJ~ll 1 S.C.R.

A similar scheme, says the Solicitor-General appearing for the Delhi Admi 0 •

nistration, will be extended to the Delhi territory. We, therefore,
annex a copy of the judgment in Writ Petitions Nos. 839 of 1979
and 563 of'1979-Azad Rickshaw ~ullers Union, Amritsar and others
v. State of Punjab & Others and Nanak Chand and Others v. State of
Punjab and Others, respectively to this judgment.
B
There is another problemiwhich arises in these two cases and that
is. that the Delhi Administration has put a ceiling on the total number
of cycle rickshaws permissible to be plied within its territory perhaps- '
we do not know for certain-this number may ~ot accommodate all
the applicants for cycle rickshaws applying licencees. We are told
c that apart from the applicants in this Court under Article 32 of the
• J
Constitution, there are numerous petitioners who have approached
the High Court of Delhi under Article 226 of the Constitution and
yet others who have filed suits in civil courts -for the same relief. All
that we can do is to accept the suggestion made by the learned Soli-
. citor-General that the Delhi Administration will effectively publicize
D and notify applications for Iicencees for plying of cycle rickshaws and'.
.1 all those who. apply will be considered' on their merits including length
of service as cycle .rickshaw pliers. The criteria that the Delhi Admi-
nistration will. adopt must be reasonable and relevant; otherwise it
will be open to the aggrieved parties to challenge the selection. Like-
wise we do not want to fetter the rights of parties aggrieved if the·
E
ceiling upon the total number of rickshaws permissible within the Delhi
territory ·is arbitrary.
On the basis of reasonable criteria the Delhi Administration will
direct the concerned Municipal authorities to grant licences for plying
rickshaws and if the· applicants so chosen are not owners themselves
F all the facilities we have indicatecl in the Amritsar order will be·
':! extended to such cycle rickshaw pliers fixing reasonable time limits.
With these directions we dispose of the applications. Until fresh licences
are issued by the Delhi Administration and the fV!unicipal authorities.
the present petitioners will be allowed to ply their cycle rickshaws.

., . N.V.K.