The Supreme Court has received a petition from advocate‑petitioner Narendra Kumar Goswami demanding that the government disclose the chemical composition of the newly rolled‑out E20 fuel and certify its safety for all vehicles. The petition argues that citizens have a constitutional right to know what they are buying and whether their vehicles can use it without damage.
Key Developments
- The petitioner invokes fundamental rights, including equal treatment, right to livelihood, and Article 300A, to claim a “silent compulsion” in forcing E20 use.
- Reference is made to the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 to argue that knowing fuel composition is a constitutional requirement when the state mandates a market.
- The petition highlights technical concerns: ethanol’s hygroscopic nature, lower energy density, and possible impact on fuel‑system materials, engine performance, and warranty.
- The BIS has already issued an E20 specification, and the Ministry of Road Transport and Highways (MoRTH) released a staggered compatibility schedule indicating that E20 suitability varies by vehicle model.
- The petitioner does not oppose the ethanol‑blending policy, which aims at energy security, reduced crude imports, environmental benefits, and farmer support.
- A request is made for an independent expert committee comprising representatives from the Petroleum Ministry, MoRTH, BIS, consumer bodies, automobile engineers, fuel technologists, environmental and public‑health experts to examine real‑world E20 compatibility.
Important Facts
• Higher ethanol blends (22‑30%) are exempt from central excise duty, encouraging wider adoption.
• Ethanol is hygroscopic, meaning it absorbs moisture, which can cause corrosion in fuel lines and affect engine efficiency.
• Energy density of E20 is lower than pure petrol, potentially reducing mileage by about 2‑3%.
• The compatibility schedule released by MoRTH lists specific vehicle makes and models that can safely ru