THE BEYOND OBITER LAW BLOG: Law & Policy
2 min read
The Office of the Attorney General for India has categorically denied media reports claiming that Attorney General R. Venkataramani described the Government’s 20% Ethanol Blended Petrol (E20) Programmeas an “ongoing experiment” before the Supreme Court. Calling such reports “completely false”, the Attorney General's office clarified that no such submission was ever made and urged the media to accurately report judicial proceedings, particularly in matters involving important national policy initiatives.
The clarification comes against the backdrop of a series of legal proceedings concerning the implementation of the Ethanol Blended Petrol (EBP) Programme.
The first challenge reached the Supreme Court on 1 September 2025, when a Public Interest Litigation sought to halt the nationwide rollout of E20 fuel. The petitioner argued that vehicles manufactured prior to April 2023 were not compatible with E20 petrol and sought directions to ensure the continued availability of ethanol-free (E0) petrol. Declining to interfere, the Supreme Court dismissed the petition, holding that decisions relating to fuel blending policy fall within the executive’s policy domain aimed at reducing crude oil imports and lowering carbon emissions.
Thereafter, on 17 October 2025, Oil Marketing Companies (OMCs) finalised procurement contracts for the Ethanol Supply Year (ESY) 2025-26. Supply contracts were awarded to 378 suppliers, covering approximately 1,050 crore litres of ethanol under the national Ethanol Blended Petrol Programme.
The present round of litigation commenced after the Karnataka High Court, by an order dated 23 June 2026, directed Oil Marketing Companies to reconsider the request of M/s Vinp Distilleries seeking enhancement of its ethanol allocation before finalising the tender process.
Aggrieved by the High Court’s order, Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited (BPCL) approached the Supreme Court, contending that reopening allocations that had already been finalised in October 2025 would disrupt the national ethanol blending framework.
On 30 June 2026, a Vacation Bench comprising Justice M. M. Sundresh and Justice Sheel Nagu issued notice in the matter and directed the parties to maintain status quo with respect to ethanol allocation for ESY 2025-26. During the hearing, the Attorney General submitted that similar disputes concerning ethanol allocation were pending before several High Courts and informed the Court that the Union Government proposed to file transfer petitions before the Supreme Court so that common questions of law arising from the same contractual framework could be decided together, thereby avoiding conflicting judicial decisions.
Following the hearing, certain media reports claimed that the Attorney General had informed the Supreme Court that the Government’s E20 programme was “still an ongoing experiment” and that its impact would become clearer next year. The reports quickly gained traction on social media, triggering public debate over the implementation of the national ethanol blending policy.
Responding to the controversy, the Attorney General’s office, through the Ministry of Law and Justice, issued an official clarification on 1 July 2026.
The clarification stated:
“These reports are completely false and do not reflect anything even close to the actual submissions made before the Hon’ble Court.”
It further clarified:
“At no stage was any submission made that the Government’s Ethanol Blended Petrol (EBP) Programme or the E20 blending programme is an ‘experiment.’ It is clarified in explicit terms that any suggestion that the Government described the E20 programme before the Hon’ble Supreme Court as an ‘experiment’ is incorrect and does not represent the submissions made on behalf of the Union of India.”
According to the clarification, the Attorney General’s submissions before the Supreme Court were confined to explaining the existence of multiple pending writ petitions concerning ethanol allocation before different High Courts and the Union Government’s proposal to transfer those matters to the Supreme Court to ensure uniform adjudication.
The Attorney General’s office further explained that consolidation of the litigation would facilitate an expeditious resolution of disputes while ensuring that ethanol supplies to Oil Marketing Companies remain unaffected under the national Ethanol Blended Petrol Programme.
The clarification also noted that it was on the basis of these submissions that the Supreme Court directed maintenance of status quo in respect of ethanol allocation for the current Ethanol Supply Year (2025-26), pending consideration of the proposed transfer petitions.
Emphasising the importance of accurate reporting of court proceedings, the Attorney General’s office urged members of the media to exercise due care, particularly in matters concerning significant national policy initiatives. It reiterated that the Union Government never characterised the E20 programme as an “experiment” before the Supreme Court and that reports suggesting otherwise were wholly incorrect.