Expert Expressions
CP Rajendran is a geoscientist and an adjunct professor at the National Institute of Advanced Studies, Bengaluru and co-author of the book: The Rumbling Earth – The Story of Indian Earthquakes
The Aravalli range, one of the world's oldest fold-mountain systems, has become the centre of a significant legal and environmental debate following the Supreme Court's decision to place its own November 20, 2025 ruling in abeyance. That ruling had accepted a government-proposed definition classifying Aravalli hills as landforms rising 100 metres or more above local relief, with ranges formed by hills within 500 metres of each other.
The controversy
Environmental groups and experts strongly criticised the criteria. Data from the Forest Survey of India indicated that a strict 100-metre cut-off could exclude a vast majority of smaller hillocks and lower formations. An internal assessment revealed that barely 1,048—or just 8.7%—of 12,081 Aravalli hills that are 20 metres or higher in Rajasthan meet the 100-metre threshold. When all 118,575 Aravalli hills are considered, over 90% fail to qualify. This sparked widespread protests across Rajasthan and Haryana over fears of ecological damage and unregulated mining, with critics arguing that the narrow definition would open vast segments of the range to limestone mining and stone crushing, resulting in acute health problems among local villagers.
Supreme Court's intervention
On December 29, 2025, a vacation bench led by Chief Justice Surya Kant placed the November 20 order in abeyance, citing "profound concern" among environmentalists about "the potential for misinterpretation and improper implementation" of the 100-metre norm. The court initiated suo motu proceedings and ordered the creation of a high-powered, independent expert committee to re-evaluate the ecological impact of the definition. The court specifically flagged several "critical ambiguities": whether limiting protection to areas within 500 metres between hills sharply narrowed the protected territory; whether the definition turned many Aravalli areas into "non-Aravalli," facilitating mining and commercial activities; and whether the claim that only 1,048 hills qualify was scientifically sound. Pending the fresh assessment, no new mining leases or renewals are being granted across the Aravalli landscape. The Union Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change has issued directions for a complete ban on new mining leases, a prohibition that applies uniformly across the entire Aravalli range.
The high-powered committee
A five-member committee headed by Kanchan Devi, Director General of the Indian Council of Forestry Research and Education (ICFRE), has been constituted to conduct the independent review. Its members include Dr Subhash Ashutosh, former director general of the Forest Survey of India; Dr Rajendra Kumar Sharma, former director of the Geological Survey of India; Brij Mohan Singh Rathore, former joint secretary in the Environment Ministry and Prof Ashok K Bhatnagar, former head of the Department of Botany at Delhi University. Professor Jagdish Krishnaswamy of the Indian Institute for Human Settlements, Bengaluru, and Prof Laxmikant Sharma of the Central University of Haryana have been appointed as special invitees. The committee has been directed to finalise criteria covering geological, hydrological and ecological factors rather than relying on a single height threshold. The committee's mandate includes determining whether the 100-metre elevation threshold is scientifically sound, whether Aravalli hills form a continuous ecological formation even when separated by distances greater than 500 metres and whether mining should be permitted in intervening gaps.
The deadline and recent developments
The Supreme Court initially directed the committee to submit its comprehensive report by August 31, 2026. When the panel sought a six-month extension until February 28, 2027, the court rejected the request on September 7, 2026, with Chief Justice Surya Kant observing that the committee appeared to be seeking "an adjournment till my retirement". The bench directed the panel to submit its final report by November 30, 2026, warning that failure would result in the committee being reconstituted. "Let the panel work day and night to submit a report on the Aravalli issue," the CJI observed. The court also directed the committee to undertake comprehensive consultations, including hearing tribal communities in Rajasthan and Gujarat, and permitted issue-specific interim reports where necessary.
The Aravalli range serves as a critical ecological barrier against the eastward spread of the Thar Desert, recharges the aquifers that sustain agriculture and drinking water supplies across Rajasthan, Haryana, Delhi, and Gujarat, and harbours a unique assemblage of flora and fauna. The Supreme Court has recognised the range as the "indispensable ecological and socio-economic backbone" of north-western India. The outcome of this expert review will determine whether the Aravallis receive protection as a continuous, interconnected ecosystem or whether large segments remain vulnerable to mining and development. The Supreme Court's willingness to pause its own order and seek fresh scientific assessment reflects the gravity of the issue—and the high stakes for one of India's most ancient and ecologically vital landscapes. The issues at hand—specifically the scientific definition, boundary demarcation and environmental protection of the Aravalli hills—are of immense importance, not only for the ecological integrity of the region but also for the health, livelihoods, and constitutional rights of the millions of people who live in and around the range.
The proposed 100-metre elevation threshold may leave fragile slopes and buffer zones vulnerable to destructive commercial mining and real estate development. This concern is widely shared by rural communities and environmental experts, who have long argued that such a narrow definition exposes vast segments of the range to limestone mining and stone crushing. The consequences are already visible: acute respiratory and other health problems among local villagers, depletion of groundwater, loss of biodiversity and the irreversible scarring of an ancient landscape. A definition based solely on elevation fails to capture the ecological, hydrological, and geological continuity of the Aravallis and risks reducing a living mountain system to a series of isolated hillocks that can be picked off one by one.
The geological criteria that could be used for a more comprehensive definition of the Aravalli mountain range should include lithological continuity, structural features such as fault lines and fold belts, groundwater recharge zones and the presence of characteristic mineral assemblages—factors that together provide a far more robust basis for demarcation than elevation. To note, independent scientists, including myself, have petitioned against the composition of the earlier panel, citing a lack of diverse ecological and hydrological expertise. Recent newspaper reports indicate that villagers are dissatisfied with their limited interaction with the technical committee. A committee whose mandate is to determine the fate of an entire mountain range cannot afford to be seen as remote, opaque, or unrepresentative. To be effective, this committee should work to gain public confidence and address these grievances.
The committee should engage directly with residents on the ground—through structured consultations, inclusive public hearings, and comprehensive field visits—as this is essential for gathering robust feedback and collecting the data needed to answer the key scientific questions. A definition of the Aravallis that is not informed by the lived experience of those who depend on the range will remain both scientifically incomplete and socially unjust.
Adopt a holistic, science-driven approach
The Western Ghats Ecology Expert Panel (WGEEP), led by Madhav Gadgil, set a benchmark for conservation by treating the entire mountain range as a single, fragile ecosystem. Its recommendations were built on a science-driven, bottom-up framework that prioritised strict environmental safeguards and community-led governance. A key achievement of this approach was its recommendation to shift from a top-down bureaucratic model to a decentralised, grassroots one, empowering local bodies such as Gram Sabhas and panchayats to manage local resources. The WGEEP demonstrated that conservation and democratic participation are not competing goals but mutually reinforcing ones—and that communities living closest to a resource are often its most effective stewards.
Therefore, I strongly suggest and urge the current high-powered committee to consider the following suggestions:
1. A multi-criteria scientific definition of the Aravalli range, treating the entire mountain as a single ecosystem, incorporating geological, hydrological, ecological, and cultural parameters;
2. Identification and protection of critical buffer zones, recharge areas and wildlife corridors;
3. A participatory mapping exercise involving local communities, independent scientists, and relevant government agencies;
4. Transparent, time-bound public consultation processes; and
5. Recommendations for a decentralised governance framework that empowers Gram Sabhas and local institutions.
The Aravallis are among the oldest mountain ranges on earth and serve as a critical ecological barrier against the eastward spread of the Thar Desert. They recharge the aquifers that sustain agriculture and drinking water supplies across Rajasthan, Haryana, Delhi, and Gujarat and harbour a unique assemblage of flora and fauna. To allow their continued degradation through a narrow, short-sighted definition would be a failure not only of environmental policy but of intergenerational justice.
I earnestly hope the high-powered committee will rise to this historic responsibility. The long-term protection of this ancient and ecologically vital landscape depends on the choices made now—and on whether those choices are grounded in science, inclusivity, and a genuine commitment to the public interest.
Leave a comment