Supreme Court: In the present case, the judgment dated 20-11-2025, which formally accepted the definition of the Aravalli Hills and Ranges, prompted a spate of Interlocutory Applications, Miscellaneous Applications, and petitions before this Court, many of which sought clarification on the directions contained in that judgment. The three-member Bench of Surya Kant, CJ., and J.K. Maheshwari and Augustine George, JJ., to uphold complete justice and serve the broader public interest, stayed the Committee’s recommendations, together with the findings and directions in the judgment dated 20-11-2025. The Court stated that this stay shall remain in force until the proceedings reach finality, ensuring that no irreversible administrative or ecological measures are undertaken under the current framework.
The Court further directed the formation of a High-Powered Expert Committee to reassess the earlier Committee’s Report and to clarify the definition of the Aravalli Hills and Ranges, identifying exclusions, evaluating ecological risks of mining, and analyzing environmental impacts to ensure ecological integrity.
Background
Aravalli Hills and Range (Aravallis), frequently characterized as the ‘green lungs’ of Northwestern India, have for centuries sustained diverse ecosystems and underpinned the livelihoods of numerous communities. Owing to its ancient geological formation, the Aravallis also host some of the nation’s most significant mineral deposits.
It has been alleged that the Aravallis have been subjected to escalating anthropogenic pressures, with decades of unchecked urbanization, systematic deforestation, and intensive resource extraction. This Court vide the order dated 9-5-2024, acknowledged the necessity for a precise definition of the ‘Aravalli Hills and Ranges’ and directed to constitute a committee tasked with formulating a uniform definition. The Committee in its Report provided the following definitions of the ‘Aravalli Hills and Ranges’:
“Aravali Hills: Any landform located in the Aravali districts, having an elevation of 100 metres or more from the local relief, shall be termed as Aravali Hills. For this purpose, the local relief shall be determined with reference to the lowest contour line encircling the landform, as per Para-5.1.1 above. The entire landform lying within the area enclosed by such lowest contour, whether actual or extended notionally, together with the Hill, its supporting slopes and associated landforms irrespective of their gradient, shall be deemed to constitute part of the Aravali Hills.
Aravali Range: Two or more Aravali Hills, as defined at Para 5.1.2 above, located within the proximity of 500m from each other, measured from the outermost point on the boundary of the lowest contour line on either side forms Aravali Range. The area between the two Aravali hills is determined by first creating buffers with a width.”
Subsequently, this Court, in its judgment dated 20-11-2025, formally accepted its findings, including the definition. The above judgment has, however, invited a spate of Interlocutory Applications, Miscellaneous Applications, and petitions before this Court challenging the findings of the Committee and the subsequent approval accorded by this Court, while also seeking clarification on certain directions stipulated in the judgment dated 20-11-2025.
Analysis, Law, and Decision
The Court noted that there had been a significant outcry among environmentalists, who have expressed profound concern about the potential for misinterpretation and improper implementation of the newly adopted definition and this Court’s directions. This public dissent stemmed from the perceived ambiguity and lack of clarity in directives issued by this Court. Consequently, there is a dire need to further probe and clarify to prevent any regulatory gaps that might undermine the ecological integrity of the Aravalli region.
The Court stated that prior to the implementation of the Committee’s Report, or the execution of the directions contained in Paragraph 50 of judgment dated 20-11-2025, a fair, impartial, independent expert opinion must be obtained and considered, after associating all requisite stakeholders. Such a step is essential to resolve critical ambiguities and to provide definitive guidance on the following issues:
-
Whether defining the Aravalli Hills and Ranges, only as the 500-meter strip between hills paradoxically shrinks protection, narrowing the safeguarded area instead of covering the broader ecosystem.
-
It must be assessed whether this restrictive demarcation expands ‘non-Aravalli’ zones, enabling unregulated mining in ecologically linked but excluded terrains.
-
Do Aravalli Hills above 100 m form a contiguous ecology beyond the 500 m limit? And if so, can regulated mining occur in these gaps, and what spatial parameters to be utilized to preserve ecological continuity?
-
Is the claim that only 1,048 of Rajasthan’s 12,081 hills meet the 100 m threshold accurate, and if so, does this regulatory gap demand a comprehensive geological survey to measure all elevations for a more nuanced protection framework?
-
Whether supplementary issues or systemic vulnerabilities arise in these proceedings that require Court intervention?
Accordingly, the Court directed to constitute a High-Powered Expert Committee comprising domain experts to undertake a comprehensive assessment of the Committee’s Report. This study shall constitute an exhaustive and holistic examination of the questions formulated above, and, among other aspects, will be framed by the following parameters:
-
Clear and comprehensive enumeration of the specific regions that fall within the scope of the recommended definition;
-
Detailed identification of the territories that would be excluded from protection under the proposed criteria;
-
An assessment of whether ‘sustainable’ or ‘regulated’ mining in the newly demarcated Aravalli areas, despite regulatory oversight, may lead to adverse ecological consequences.
-
An assessment of areas excluded from the definition, examining whether such omissions risk erasure or degradation and thereby compromise the ecological integrity of the Aravalli range;
-
Multi-temporal evaluation of the short-term and long-term environmental impacts resulting from the implementation of the recommended definition and its associated directions.
Thus, the Court issued notice to Union of Union of India and the States of NCT of Delhi, Rajasthan, Haryana and Gujarat, returnable on 21-1-2026. The Court further requested Attorney General for India, the Solicitor General of India and K. Parameshwar, Senior Advocate and Amicus Curiae to assist this Court, along with the Central Empowered Committee.
Thus, to uphold complete justice and serve the broader public interest, the Court stayed the Committee’s recommendations, together with the findings and directions in the judgment dated 20-11-2025. This stay shall remain in force until the proceedings reach logical finality, ensuring that no irreversible administrative or ecological measures are undertaken under the current framework. Further, the Court directed that, as set out in the order dated 9-5-2024, no permission shall be granted, until further orders, for mining, whether by way of new leases or renewal of existing leases, in the ‘Aravalli Hills and Ranges’ as defined in the FSI Report dated 25-8-2010, without prior leave of this Court.
Read Also: SC directs to prepare Sustainable Mining Plan for Aravali Range| SCC Times
[In Re: Definition of Aravalli Hills and Ranges and Ancillary Issues, Suo Moto Writ Petition (Civil) No. 10 of 2025]
Advocates who appeared in this case:
For Parties: Tushar Mehta, SG; Aishwarya Bhati, ASG; G.S. Makker, AOR ; Shreya Jain, Adv. ; Shagun Thakur, Adv. ; Rohan Gupta, Adv. ; M.K. Maroria, Adv. ; Manisha Chava, Adv. ; Anitha Shenoy, Sr. Adv. ; Ritwick Dutta, Adv. ; Rahul Chowdhary, Adv. ; Shishti Agnihotri, Adv. ; Ayushma Awasthi, AOR