Punjab has decided to bring ride-hailing services under the Motor Vehicles Ordinance 1965, a move that stakeholders warn could create significant practical difficulties for thousands of drivers whose livelihoods depend on the flexibility of app-based transport.
Under the new framework, ride-hailing vehicles will be required to obtain district and platform-specific permits under Section 44B of the ordinance. Drivers operating across multiple districts or using more than one ride-hailing app could need several permits, each requiring separate renewal, stakeholders say.
The burden is expected to be particularly significant in large urban centres, where drivers routinely cross administrative boundaries during a single shift. Since app-based drivers accept bookings without knowing the destination in advance, they may enter several districts in one day, creating a mismatch between how ride-hailing services operate and how the permit regime is structured.
The government says the measure will improve passenger safety, accountability and regulation of the rapidly expanding ride-hailing sector. The industry, however, argues that unlike conventional public transport, ride-hailing drivers have no fixed routes and cannot predict where trips will take them.
A ride-hailing company executive said the proposed system will significantly increase the regulatory and financial burden on drivers using multiple platforms.
A driver operating in two districts on two apps could require four permits, each involving separate fees and paperwork, the executive said, adding that this would further squeeze the incomes of full-time and part-time drivers already struggling with rising fuel, maintenance, insurance and financing costs.
While supporting regulation of passenger safety, vehicle standards, driver accountability, insurance and taxation, the executive said the framework must reflect the realities of the digital economy. A single provincial permit linked to the driver or vehicle, backed by a centralised digital registration system, was proposed as an alternative.
The executive welcomed the regulatory initiative but said the permit regime should be reviewed to avoid unnecessary costs and geographical restrictions.
