E20 ethanol blending programme not an 'experiment', AG's office clarifies
Synopsis
India's Attorney General office has issued a sharp rebuttal of media reports that claimed the government described its E20 ethanol blending programme as an 'ongoing experiment' before the Supreme Court. The clarification reveals a significant gap between what was reportedly attributed to AG Venkataramani and what was actually argued — raising pointed questions about the accuracy of judicial reporting on major national policy matters.
Key Takeaways
The AG's office on 1 July categorically rejected media reports misattributing statements to Attorney General R.
Venkataramani during a Supreme Court hearing.
Reports falsely claimed the government called the E20 ethanol blending programme an 'ongoing experiment' — a characterisation the AG's office denied in explicit terms.
AG Venkataramani had actually submitted that transfer petitions were being filed to consolidate ethanol allocation cases pending across multiple High Courts .
The Supreme Court directed filing of transfer petitions and ordered status quo on ethanol allocation for ESY 2025–26 .
The case involves BPCL's SLP against a Karnataka High Court order on allocation to VINP Distilleries and Sugars Pvt.
The AG's office urged media to report judicial proceedings accurately, especially on national policy matters.
The Office of the Attorney General (AG) of India has categorically rejected media reports claiming that the Centre described its Ethanol Blended Petrol (EBP) Programme — including the 20 per cent ethanol blending (E20) initiative — as an 'ongoing experiment' before the Supreme Court. The clarification, issued on 1 July, targets reports published the previous day that allegedly misattributed submissions made by Attorney General R. Venkataramani during a hearing of a Special Leave Petition (SLP) filed by Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited (BPCL) in an ethanol allocation matter.
What the AG's Office Actually Said
The clarification stated in explicit terms that no submission was ever made characterising the E20 programme as an experiment. 'At no stage was any submission made that the Government's Ethanol Blended Petrol (EBP) Programme or the E20 blending programme is an experiment,' the office said, adding that any such suggestion 'does not represent the submissions made on behalf of the Union of India.'
The AG's office further noted that the reports had also falsely claimed that 'the impact of the policy would become clearer by next year' — a statement it described as bearing no resemblance to what was actually argued before the court.
What Was Actually Submitted Before the Supreme Court
Attorney General Venkataramani had, in fact, informed the apex court that similar writ petitions involving identical issues relating to ethanol allocation to dedicated ethanol plants were pending before multiple High Courts. The AG submitted that transfer petitions were being filed before the Supreme Court so that common questions of law arising from the same contractual framework could be heard together, thereby avoiding parallel proceedings and the risk of conflicting judicial outcomes.
The consolidation move was also aimed at ensuring expeditious resolution of the litigation, so that ethanol supplies to oil marketing companies remain uninterrupted under the national EBP Programme — a prerequisite for sustaining 20 per cent blending throughout the year.
Supreme Court's Direction and the BPCL Case
After hearing these submissions, the Supreme Court directed that the proposed transfer petitions be filed and ordered that status quo be maintained on ethanol allocation for the current Ethanol Supply Year (ESY) 2025–26. The bench was hearing BPCL's SLP against a Karnataka High Court judgment that had ordered reconsideration of the ethanol allocation made to dedicated manufacturer VINP Distilleries and Sugars Pvt. Ltd.
AG's Office Calls for Accurate Reporting
The AG's office also urged members of the media to report judicial proceedings with 'due accuracy', particularly in matters involving important national policy initiatives. The statement underscores the sensitivity around the E20 programme, which is a cornerstone of India's energy transition and fuel import reduction strategy. This is not the first time government legal submissions have been disputed in public — misreporting of Supreme Court proceedings has drawn official rebuttals in several high-profile cases in recent years.
Point of View
Given it sits at the intersection of farm income, oil import bills, and energy transition commitments. The deeper issue is systemic: Supreme Court proceedings are routinely covered without official transcripts, creating fertile ground for misattribution. If the government is serious about accurate reporting of judicial matters involving national policy, it may need to consider releasing verified summaries of its own submissions — a practice that is standard in several other jurisdictions.
NationPress
1 Jul 2026
Frequently Asked Questions
What did the AG's office clarify about the E20 programme?
The AG's office clarified that media reports falsely claimed the government described its E20 ethanol blending programme as an 'ongoing experiment' before the Supreme Court. It stated that no such submission was ever made on behalf of the Union of India.
What was Attorney General Venkataramani's actual submission before the Supreme Court?
AG Venkataramani informed the Supreme Court that similar writ petitions on ethanol allocation to dedicated ethanol plants were pending before multiple High Courts. He submitted that transfer petitions were being filed to consolidate these cases and avoid conflicting judicial decisions.
What is the BPCL Supreme Court case about?
BPCL filed a Special Leave Petition before the Supreme Court against a Karnataka High Court judgment that ordered reconsideration of ethanol allocation made to VINP Distilleries and Sugars Pvt. Ltd., a dedicated ethanol manufacturer.
What did the Supreme Court order in this matter?
The Supreme Court directed that the proposed transfer petitions be filed and ordered that status quo be maintained on ethanol allocation for the current Ethanol Supply Year 2025–26, pending further hearing.
Why does the E20 programme matter?
The E20 programme — mandating 20 per cent ethanol blending in petrol — is central to India's strategy to cut fuel import costs and support sugarcane farmers. Any legal uncertainty around ethanol allocation could disrupt supplies to oil marketing companies and derail blending targets.
