A PIL says that about 3.16 crore domestic LPG consumers who have not completed biometric Aadhaar authentication could lose access to regulated-price refills from October 1, and the Delhi High Court has asked the Centre to state its position, listing the matter for Monday.
New Delhi: The Delhi High Court on Wednesday, September 30, sought the stand of the Central Government on a public interest litigation challenging the decision to make biometric Aadhaar authentication (BAA) mandatory for booking domestic LPG refills at the regulated price from October 1 [Pulkit Luthra v. Union of India and Others].
A Division Bench of Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Tejas Karia asked the Centre’s counsel to obtain instructions and listed the matter for hearing on Monday, October 5. The Court has made no finding on the challenge at this stage.
The impugned directions
The petitioner, Pulkit Luthra, who has a certified 75% permanent visual disability, challenges the Union Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas’s letter of September 17 and its press release of September 19, which make BAA mandatory for domestic LPG consumers. According to the petition, the letter directs oil marketing companies to block LPG refills for consumers who have not completed authentication.
The press release states that consumers who cannot or do not wish to complete authentication can obtain LPG at market prices in 5 kg or 10 kg cylinders, subject to availability. The petition says this alternative is inadequate, since it does not let such consumers keep buying the standard 14.2 kg domestic cylinder at the market price. It states that about 3.16 crore domestic LPG consumers had not completed biometric authentication as of September 14.
What the petitioner argues
Senior Advocate Parag Tripathi appeared for the petitioner, and the plea was filed through Advocate Sanyam Saxena. Luthra contends that the decision is arbitrary, disproportionate and violative of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution, because it could deprive consumers who are unable or unwilling to complete biometric authentication of regular domestic LPG cylinders at the regulated retail selling price.
He says elderly persons, persons with disabilities and other vulnerable consumers may face difficulty completing authentication, and that the iris authentication process, which requires a user to keep the eyes open and blink, poses substantial difficulty for persons with visual disabilities, as he has himself experienced. He contends that no fallback has been laid down for persistent biometric failure:
“…no clear, uniform and readily-accessible fallback mechanism has been prescribed for consumers in cases of persistent biometric failure.”
The petition also argues that Section 7 of the Aadhaar Act permits authentication for subsidies, benefits or services funded from the Consolidated Fund of India, but does not authorise making biometric authentication a mandatory condition for supplying domestic LPG at the regulated price. It says the directions lack statutory backing, depart from the government’s earlier position, and violate the right to privacy recognised in K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India.
Reliefs sought
The petition seeks to quash the letter and press release to the extent they make BAA mandatory for booking domestic LPG refills at the regulated price and permit blocking refills for consumers who have not completed authentication. It also seeks directions to the authorities to provide alternative modes of identification for those unable to authenticate.
In an interim application, Luthra seeks a stay of the impugned directions and an order restraining the authorities from blocking LPG connections or restricting consumers to smaller cylinders for not completing authentication. He also asks that standard 14.2 kg cylinders continue to be supplied at the regulated price to consumers unable to authenticate because of disability, age, disease, injury or biometric failure. The Court has not yet ruled on the interim prayer.
Case Title: Pulkit Luthra v. Union of India and Others
Bench: Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Tejas Karia, Delhi High Court
Date of Order: September 30, 2026
Appearance: Senior Advocate Parag Tripathi for the petitioner, through Advocate Sanyam Saxena