New Delhi, Aug 2026 : The Supreme Court on Monday declined to entertain a public interest litigation seeking greater transparency over the ethanol content in petrol and information on the compatibility of ethanol-blended fuel with different categories of vehicles.
A Bench comprising Justices M.M. Sundresh and Prasanna B. Varale refused to take up the petition filed by advocate N.K. Goswami, while allowing him the liberty to approach the appropriate High Court with his concerns. During the hearing, the Bench told Goswami, “Go to HC and file it.”
Appearing in person, Goswami clarified that his petition did not challenge the Centre's ethanol-blending policy or seek a halt to the use of ethanol in petrol. Instead, he argued that consumers should have access to clear information about the composition of the fuel they purchase.
“I am not challenging the policy. I just want to know. I have the right to know. Even when we buy a packet of biscuits we know the ingredients,” Goswami submitted before the Bench.
He maintained that the issue involved the fundamental rights of consumers and was not connected to any personal benefit. “We have the right to know what we are purchasing,” he argued.
Attorney General for India R. Venkataramani opposed the manner in which the matter was being pursued. He questioned the basis of seeking to make the Union government answerable through the PIL and described the petition as a “proxy petition”. He also pointed out that the Supreme Court had dismissed a similar plea in 2025.
The Bench eventually declined to entertain the petition but left it open for Goswami to seek appropriate relief before a High Court.
What the PIL Sought
The petition sought mandatory disclosure of the ethanol percentage at petrol pumps, including information displayed directly on fuel dispensing nozzles and printed on fuel invoices.
It also sought the creation and publication of an official vehicle-wise database specifying which vehicles are compatible with different ethanol blends. According to the petitioner, such information would allow consumers, particularly owners of older vehicles, to understand whether their vehicles can safely use higher ethanol-blended petrol.
The plea further sought a transparent transition framework for vehicles that may not be compatible with higher ethanol concentrations. It proposed safeguards against potential warranty, insurance and servicing disputes arising from the use of ethanol-blended fuel in vehicles that were manufactured before the widespread introduction of E20 petrol.
Goswami also sought the establishment of an independent expert committee to examine the broader implications of the ethanol-blending programme.
The petition argued that the challenge was not directed at the government's objective of promoting ethanol as an alternative fuel. Instead, it questioned what the petitioner described as a lack of consumer disclosure and choice.
“The policy, as a policy, stands unchallenged,” the plea stated, arguing that the issue concerned the “constitutional validity of a silent, unconsenting compulsion” affecting millions of consumers.
Concerns Over Older Vehicles
The petitioner's concerns centre largely on the growing availability of E20 petrol, which contains up to 20 per cent ethanol.
Goswami, who owns a 2018 Honda BR-V petrol vehicle, claimed that his vehicle was designed and sold before E20 was notified as an automotive fuel. He argued that consumers using older vehicles may not know the precise ethanol content of the petrol being dispensed at fuel stations and may have limited or no option to purchase a lower-ethanol blend.
The petition said the issue had assumed greater significance as E20 petrol became increasingly available across the country, particularly for owners of vehicles manufactured before the introduction of newer compatibility standards.
It referred to the NITI Aayog's Roadmap for Ethanol Blending in India 2020-25, released in June 2021, which contemplated a phased transition towards higher ethanol blending and discussed the continued availability of lower-ethanol fuel for older vehicles.
The plea also referred to the standards notified for E20 automotive fuel by the Union Ministry of Road Transport and Highways on March 8, 2021. It noted that the Bureau of Indian Standards issued specifications for E20 fuel in 2022 for “suitably compatible vehicles”.
According to the petition, vehicles designed for E10 and made compatible with E20 materials began entering the market from April 1, 2023, while vehicles specifically tuned for E20 engines began being rolled out from April 1, 2025.
The petitioner alleged that the increasing availability of E20 fuel had resulted in lower-ethanol blends becoming less accessible to consumers in several parts of the country.
Government's Position on E20
The Centre has consistently defended its ethanol-blending programme, citing energy security, environmental benefits and economic advantages for farmers.
The government has maintained that E20 petrol can provide better acceleration and ride quality while reducing carbon emissions by around 30 per cent compared with E10 fuel.
It has also pointed to international experience, particularly Brazil, where vehicles operate successfully on higher ethanol blends. The government has noted that major automobile manufacturers, including Toyota, Honda and Hyundai, manufacture vehicles capable of operating with higher ethanol blends in Brazil.
The Centre has argued that expanding ethanol blending can reduce India's dependence on imported crude oil, strengthen domestic energy security and create additional economic opportunities for agricultural producers, particularly sugarcane farmers.
Similar PIL Dismissed in 2025
Monday's proceedings come nearly a year after the Supreme Court rejected another PIL concerning the rollout of E20 petrol.
On September 1, 2025, a Bench headed by then Chief Justice of India B.R. Gavai and Justice K. Vinod Chandran dismissed a petition challenging what it described as the “unregulated” rollout of E20 petrol as the default fuel.
That petition had raised concerns over the use of E20 in older vehicles, arguing that higher ethanol concentrations could potentially result in material degradation, safety concerns, reduced mileage and disputes involving vehicle warranties and insurance.
It had also alleged that mandating E20 without adequate safeguards and alternatives could violate constitutional protections under Articles 14, 19(1)(g), 21 and 300A.
The Centre had strongly opposed those arguments. Attorney General Venkataramani had questioned the credentials of the petitioner and argued against allowing “outsiders” to determine the country's fuel policy, while highlighting the potential benefits of ethanol blending for farmers.
The latest case, however, was framed differently by Goswami, who repeatedly emphasised that he was not seeking to overturn the government's ethanol policy but wanted greater transparency and consumer choice.
With the Supreme Court declining to entertain the PIL, the issue of fuel labelling, vehicle compatibility and consumer information may now move to the High Court, where the petitioner has been given liberty to pursue his grievances.
