‘Illegal’ Marathi Language Rule: Mumbai Cab Drivers Vs State Govt Battle Reaches High Court

Mumbai cab drivers move HC


Mumbai: Auto and taxi drivers’ battle with the Maharashtra government will now be fought in the court.

Amid a crackdown on non-Marathi-speaking drivers in Maharashtra, four app-based cab drivers from Mumbai approached the Bombay High Court on Tuesday, challenging the state government’s order that makes working knowledge of Marathi compulsory.

The PIL by four Uber drivers, filed through advocate Vivek Shukla, claimed that the notification violated their fundamental rights under Articles 14 (right to equality), 19 (freedom to carry on trade and profession) and 21 (right to life) of the Constitution and did not align with the Motor Vehicles (MV) Act, 1988, a Central Act.

In their plea, the drivers have argued that the rule could put livelihoods of lakhs of drivers at risk, Bar and Bench reported.

The drivers sought urgent directions and an immediate stay on the government notification issued on August 12.

The petition is expected to be mentioned before the Chief Justice on August 26.

Questioning the legal basis of the state government’s decision, the drivers stated that the new language requirement goes beyond the powers granted to the state under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.

According to the plea, the legislation does not prescribe proficiency or working knowledge of a particular language as a condition for obtaining a driving licence, securing a driver’s badge or holding a permit.

“The scale of the notification is enormous. As stated by the Hon’ble Transport Minister himself in the press, about 9,65,000 rickshaw and taxi permits and badges have been issued in the state so far. As per the government’s own statements, about 1,65,000 non-Marathi speaking drivers attended the 105-day ‘Hinduhridaysamrat Balasaheb Thackeray Marathi Language Campaign’ conducted through the Konkan Marathi Sahitya Parishad and the Mumbai Marathi Sahitya Sangh. Lakhs of drivers remain exposed to notices, suspension and cancellation,” the plea claimed, as reported by Bar and Bench.



Exit mobile version