The Supreme Court on Monday directed maintenance of status quo in the dispute arising out of the allocation of ethanol under the Centre’s Ethanol Blended Petrol (EBP) Programme, while agreeing to hear the batch of connected matters in the first week after reopening.
The matter was heard by a Bench of Justices M.M. Sundresh and Sheel Nagu. The dispute arises from a Karnataka High Court order directing oil marketing companies (OMCs) to reopen the ethanol allocation process for the 2025–26 Ethanol Supply Year (ESY) after holding that certain ethanol manufacturers had been wrongly excluded from allocation despite meeting the eligibility criteria. The High Court directed the OMCs to reconsider the representations of the affected manufacturers and undertake a fresh allocation exercise. Aggrieved by the order, the petitioner approached the Supreme Court, contending that reopening the allocation process after contracts had already been awarded and supplies commenced would disrupt the implementation of the Centre’s Ethanol Blended Petrol (EBP) Programme, which aims to achieve 20% ethanol blending in petrol.
During the hearing, the Attorney General R. Venkataramani submitted that the dispute raises issues extending beyond the individual contracts and concerns the implementation of the Centre’s national policy of achieving 20% ethanol blending with petrol. He argued that the controversy requires authoritative interpretation by the Supreme Court, particularly regarding the contractual provisions governing ethanol procurement.
“
“It is a national policy… every year there will either be a spurt in demand or a fall in demand. Twenty percent ethanol-petrol blending is something which the Government is trying to implement. Therefore, one particular point needs an interpretation by this Court,” the Attorney General submitted.
He further contended that similar petitions were pending before different High Courts, including Nagpur and Patna, creating the possibility of conflicting directions. According to the Attorney General, the issue requires a uniform judicial approach as it impacts ethanol allocation across the country.
Counsel opposing the plea argued that the petitioners had bypassed the statutory appellate remedy before the Division Bench and questioned the delay in filing transfer petitions despite similar matters having remained pending before various High Courts for several months.
After hearing the parties, the Bench directed that status quo shall be maintained. The Court also ordered that any representations made pursuant to the impugned High Court order shall not be decided in the meantime.
The Bench directed the Registry to tag the connected special leave petitions and list the batch in the first week after reopening, observing that the issue should be decided before the commencement of the next ethanol supply cycle.
This matter arises from challenges to High Court orders concerning ethanol allocation under the Centre’s blending programme, which seeks to increase ethanol blending in petrol as part of India’s energy security and clean fuel policy.