Introduction
The Supreme Court of India dismissed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) challenging the nationwide rollout of 20% ethanol-blended petrol (E20) on 1 September 2025, thereby backing the government’s green energy initiative and rejecting the plea for consumer choice of ethanol-free petrol (E0).
Background of the Petition
The PIL was filed by Akshay Malhotra, arguing that E20 fuel, now widely available at petrol pumps across the country, is incompatible with many older vehicles, particularly those manufactured before April 2023, including some BS-VI models. The petitioner contended that making E20 mandatory for all consumers is unfair: first, it may reduce fuel efficiency; second, it leads to higher maintenance costs; and third, it could negatively affect engine durability. The petition relied on a 2021 NITI Aayog report, which predicted a 5–7% drop in mileage for vehicles not specifically engineered for E20.
Senior Advocate Shadan Farasat clarified that the challenge was about lack of consumer choice, not opposition to India’s ethanol policy itself. The petition sought directions to ensure the availability of both E0 and E20 fuel at retail outlets.
Government’s View
Attorney General R. Venkataramani argued for dismissal of the PIL. He stated that the E20 rollout was guided by public interest and served two key intentions: supporting farmers (since ethanol is derived from crops like sugarcane and maize, boosting agricultural livelihoods), and reducing India’s dependence on imported crude oil. For reference, India spent over $132.4 billion on crude oil imports during 2023–2024, according to trade data.
The Attorney General asserted that providing ethanol-free alternatives would undermine the program’s effectiveness due to lost economies of scale and confusion among producers and manufacturers. The government also highlighted its long-term climate commitment, including net-zero carbon emissions by 2070.
Supreme Court Decision
Chief Justice B.R. Gavai and Justice K. Vinod Chandran dismissed the PIL, stating that E20 regulations are policy matters within the government’s economic and environmental priorities—not for judicial interference unless shown to be arbitrary, mala fide, or unconstitutional.
The Court accepted the government’s argument that allowing both E0 and E20 would weaken the ethanol fuel program’s intended benefits, which include lowering carbon emissions, safeguarding agricultural interests, and supporting India’s transition to sustainable energy. The bench emphasized that short-term inconvenience for some vehicle owners should not outweigh long-term policy objectives.
Other Opinions
Industry groups such as the Society of Indian Automobile Manufacturers (SIAM) have assured the public that E20 does not pose significant safety risks, though there may be a modest drop in mileage for vehicles not designed for E20—usually in the range of 2–4% (in some older vehicles up to 5–7%), but no evidence has emerged of higher engine failures. SIAM stated warranties and insurance should cover any potential issues for consumers.
Economically, the E20 rollout is projected to save billions in foreign exchange by reducing crude imports and to create stable demand for India’s sugarcane and maize farmers—critical for a country where a large proportion of the workforce is employed in agriculture. The move also helps India advance its Net Zero 2070 goals.
Public Concerns and Criticism
Consumer reactions remain divided. Critics argue that exclusive availability of E20 disproportionately affects middle- and lower-income drivers with older vehicles; surveys found many reported increased wear and lower fuel efficiency. The NITI Aayog’s 2021 report suggested keeping E10 available for non-E20 compliant vehicles, and recommended lower pricing for higher ethanol blends to offset efficiency losses—recommendations not adopted in the government’s uniform approach. Additional concerns include the risk of even higher blends (E30, E50) being mandated in future without adequate planning.
Conclusion
The Supreme Court’s dismissal of the PIL clarifies the judiciary’s stance of non-interference in energy and environmental policy decisions, unless clear evidence of arbitrariness or unconstitutionality is presented. The E20 rollout is poised to reshape India’s energy landscape, balancing short-term consumer concerns against long-term national interest, sustainability, and agricultural welfare.
References
