Delhi | Enewsxpress Desk:
What Happened
The Supreme Court on Monday refused to hear a Public Interest Litigation that asked the government and other authorities to put clear and uniform labels on every fuel nozzle at petrol pumps showing the exact amount of ethanol mixed into the petrol sold.
A bench composed of Justices M.M. Sundresh and P.B. Varale explained that the Supreme Court was not willing to hear the plea under Article 32 of the Constitution which lets citizens go directly to the Supreme Court for their rights. The bench told the petitioner that the petitioner should go to the High Court that has the jurisdiction for relief. The Court wrote in its order: “Petition dismissed. The petitioner may approach the authority.”
Who Filed the Plea. What It Sought
The petitioner was advocate Narendra Kumar Goswami, who stood before the Supreme Court in person. The petitioner asked the Supreme Court to order that every petrol pump in the country must show the ethanol percentage on every fuel nozzle in a clear and readable way. The petitioner also asked that every fuel receipt must list the ethanol content of the petrol sold.
Goswamis plea also sought
The petitioner wanted the government to create and publish within a set time a database that shows which cars can use which ethanol blends. The database should be organized by manufacturer, model, engine type and year of manufacture.
The petitioner also wanted an independent expert committee to be formed. This committee would include people from the Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas the Ministry of Road Transport and Highways the Bureau of Indian Standards and independent automobile engineers. The committee would study the effects of ethanol-blended fuel and give a public report.
During the hearing the petitioner said that the petitioner was not fighting the governments policy on mixing ethanol into petrol. The petitioner only wanted disclosure of ethanol content to consumers. The petitioner said, “Not me but all citizens should know what is in the fuel they get.” The petitioner argued that the petitioner has a right to know the petrol content at the pumps.
The Governments Response
Attorney General R. Venkataramani, who spoke for the Centre rejected the petitioner. The Attorney General called the petition a ” litigation” and said that a similar petition had already been dismissed by the Supreme Court. The Attorney General said, “The petitioner wants the government of India to answer to him.” The bench also asked the petitioner why the petitioner went to the Supreme Court instead of first going to the High Court.
Background: A Related Petition Dismissed Year
This is not the time the Supreme Court has refused to hear a challenge to the governments E20 ethanol-blending plan. A year ago another Public Interest Litigation was heard, filed by lawyer Akshay Malhotra. The Supreme Court, led by then-Chief Justice B.R. Gavai declined to hear a challenge to the governments plan to introduce 20% ethanol petrol (E20) without giving customers an option to buy petrol without ethanol. That petition asked the Supreme Court to keep ethanol- petrol available to put clear labels on E20 fuel and to study the effect of the fuel on cars that were not made for higher ethanol blends. The Supreme Court rejected that petition too citing the governments claim that E20 fuel helps sugarcane farmers.
Why Ethanol Blending Is a Live Issue
E20 petrol, which has 20% ethanol and 80% petrol is a part of the governments plan to reduce crude oil imports, lower vehicle emissions and support biofuels made in the country. Car makers have started making E20- models but people still worry about older cars and whether they can use higher ethanol blends. People also worry about fuel efficiency and engine wear. These worries have led to petitions like this one and the earlier ones that were heard by the Supreme Court.
What This Means Going Forward
Because the Supreme Court has twice turned down petitions about ethanol petitioners who want policy changes or mandatory disclosure must go to the High Courts or other proper authorities. The debate about ethanol-blended fuel, which covers consumer disclosure, car compatibility and environmental policy is still open at the court, in the country.
Note: This article is based on news reports.
