While SDAD said it has been agitating peacefully with permission, Rajdhani contended that it was only operating tourist cabs and it was SDAD which was involved in the incidents of violence.
The court, however, noted in its order that “if not by the defendants (SDAD and Rajdhani), then the incidents are happening at behest of the defendants as no one else would be interested in indulging therein”.
It said if such incidents continue the defendants only would stand to lose as people would adopt other means of transport and will no longer have faith in them.
