Government Clarifies E20 Blending Programme is Not an 'Experiment'
The Indian government has issued a strong clarification on Tuesday night, refuting claims that its E20 blending programme is an "experiment." This came in response to reports suggesting that the government had described the initiative as such before the Supreme Court. The statement from the Law Ministry emphasized that no such submission was ever made regarding the Ethanol Blended Petrol (EBP) Programme or the E20 blending programme.
The government's statement read:
"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 Supreme Court as an 'experiment' is incorrect and does not represent the submissions made on behalf of the Union of India."
This clarification followed media reports that claimed Attorney General R Venkataraman had told the Supreme Court that the E20 blended petrol program was "still an ongoing experiment." Additionally, some reports misquoted him as saying that "the impact of the policy would become clearer by next year."
"These reports are completely false and do not reflect anything even close to the actual submissions made before the Court... Members of the media are requested to report judicial proceedings with due accuracy, particularly in matters involving important national policy initiatives," the government release stated.
What Led to the Legal Dispute?
The case reached the Supreme Court after the Karnataka High Court passed an order directing Oil Marketing Companies (OMCs) to consider increasing ethanol allocation for VINP Distilleries and Sugars. The company operates a dedicated ethanol plant that supplies denatured anhydrous ethanol exclusively to oil marketing companies under long-term agreements.
VINP Distilleries had approached the court in response to a tender floated by OMCs in September 2025 for 1,050 crore litres of ethanol for the 2025-26 supply year. The company bid to supply 9.3 crore litres but was only allocated 3.9 crore litres, creating a shortfall of 6.3 crore litres.
The company argued that this reduction was arbitrary and highlighted its substantial investments in building a dedicated ethanol plant based on long-term supply agreements and past conduct. As a dedicated plant, it is contractually bound to sell only to OMCs and would face difficulties in pivoting to other products.
Meanwhile, the OMCs maintained that the dispute arose out of a contract and that a writ petition was not maintainable.
SC Orders Status Quo on Karnataka HC Ruling
The Supreme Court has ordered a status quo on the Karnataka High Court's direction to increase ethanol allocation for the Ethanol Supply Year 2025-26. A bench of Justices M M Sundresh and Sheel Nagu issued notice on a plea filed by Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd challenging the high court order.
The Karnataka High Court had directed Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited, Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited, and Indian Oil Corporation Limited to consider and decide a representation submitted by a dedicated ethanol manufacturer seeking enhanced ethanol allocation for ESY 2025-26. The high court held that dedicated ethanol plants—established under government policy and contractually bound to supply ethanol exclusively to OMCs—cannot be denied the benefit of preferential allocation under the Long-Term Offtake Agreement.
Attorney General R Venkataramani argued that the high court's order would destabilize the national policy. He also noted that ethanol supply contracts were concluded in October 2025, and allocations were communicated to 378 suppliers. Venkataramani informed the Supreme Court that 680 crore litres of ethanol (out of the total supply of 1,050 crore litres) had already been supplied by June 18. He contended that increasing the quota for one supplier would prompt others to claim parity, leading to a flood of litigation.
No comments:
Post a Comment