Saving the Aravallis: A Pragmatic Suo Motu Intervention by the Supreme Court

Surinder Ambardar
(Socio-political Analyst)

The Aravalli range, which arcs from Gujarat through Rajasthan and Haryana to Delhi, has long been described as a geological palimpsest: more than a billion years old, continuously reworked by tectonics, erosion, and, in recent decades, by aggressive human intervention. Its rocky ridges, scrub forests, dry deciduous patches, and interspersed valleys form a fragile but indispensable ecological infrastructure for north‑western India, moderating climate, recharging aquifers, holding back desert sands, and sustaining complex human and non‑human communities. Yet this ancient range now stands at the centre of a fraught legal and political controversy, triggered by the Supreme Court’s recent suo motu proceedings on the “issue relating to definition of Aravalli Hills and Ranges” and its November 2025 judgment that accepted a new, elevation‑based definition while simultaneously freezing new mining leases pending a comprehensive Management Plan for Sustainable Mining (MPSM).

The core of the present dispute lies in a paradox. On the one hand, the Court explicitly recognises the Aravallis as an ecologically critical, climate‑sensitive, and internationally significant landscape requiring strong protection and restoration. On the other, by endorsing a uniform definition that classifies only those landforms rising at least 100 metres above local relief as “Aravalli hills,” it risks placing vast stretches of low‑elevation hills, scrub ridges, and foothill systems outside the formal category of “Aravalli” for regulatory purposes, even as mining, urban expansion and infrastructure projects seek new frontiers. The “Save Aravallis” campaign, led by civil society groups, local communities and environmental experts, has emerged in response to precisely this tension between geological continuity and legal abstraction, ecological imperatives, and extractive ambitions.

I. History, significance, and the making of the Aravalli crisis

Geologically, the Aravallis are among the oldest surviving fold mountains on the planet, their origins traced to Precambrian tectonic events and the Aravalli–Delhi orogeny more than 1–1.5 billion years ago. The present‑day range runs for roughly 700–800 kilometres across four states of Gujarat, Rajasthan, Haryana and Delhi, though its once imposing peaks have weathered into subdued ridges and isolated hillocks, reflecting immense antiquity and long‑term erosion. Guru Shikhar on Mount Abu, at 1,722 metres, marks the highest point, but most of the system consists of modest elevations, broken escarpments, stony plateaus, and undulating foothills that nonetheless play a disproportionate ecological role.

Historically, the range has functioned as both barrier and bridge. Its spurs and passes influenced early trade routes, military campaigns, and the siting of forts and settlements along its length. Rajput polities used the Aravalli ridge as a defensive framework, evident in hill forts such as Kumbhalgarh and Chittorgarh that now carry UNESCO World Heritage status. Pastoral and agrarian communities—Meos, Gujjars, Jats, Bhils, and others—developed intricate livelihoods around grazing, rainfed agriculture, fuelwood collection and minor forest produce along the slopes and valleys. Sacred tanks, stepwells, and johads dotted the landscape, relying on the hills’ hydrology to recharge local water bodies.

Spiritual and cultural geographies layer this physical terrain. Places like Mount Abu, Ranakpur, and Pushkar anchor major Hindu and Jain pilgrimage circuits, while Ajmer Sharif marks an important Sufi centre nestled within the Aravalli foothills. Village‑level sacred groves and hill shrines, often governed by customary taboos against tree felling and hunting, once created informal conservation islands within the wider mosaic of use. These practices suggest that, long before modern environmental law, communities recognised the hills not merely as extractive frontiers but as intrinsically valued and spiritually resonant spaces.

The ecological significance of the Aravallis is now widely documented. As a “great wall in the north,” the range moderates the eastward advance of the Thar Desert, acting as a barrier against sand‑laden winds and contributing to the regulation of dust storms and air quality in the plains. Gaps torn in the range by quarrying and deforestation have been directly correlated with increased dust transport towards Delhi‑NCR and adjoining regions, exacerbating already severe particulate pollution. Hydrologically, the weathered and fractured rocks of the Aravallis serve as powerful recharge media; rainwater infiltrates rather than runs off, sustaining aquifers that feed rivers such as the Sabarmati, Luni and Mahi, as well as tributaries of the Yamuna and Chambal. The Union government’s own Aravalli landscape restoration plan underscores that the range forms a watershed divide between drainage into the Bay of Bengal and the Arabian Sea, and supports key wetlands like Sambhar, Jaisamand, Pushkar, and Sultanpur.

Biodiversity patterns mirror this ecological complexity. The Aravalli belt supports dry deciduous forests, scrublands, savanna‑like grasslands, and wetlands that collectively host leopard, hyena, wolf, jackal, sloth bear, blackbuck, chital, and numerous other mammals, alongside a rich avifauna including migratory waterbirds. Twenty‑two wildlife sanctuaries, including tiger reserves such as Sariska and Ranthambore in the broader Aravalli–Vindhyan landscape, attest to this conservation value. Ecologists repeatedly warn that fragmentation of these habitats and corridors, particularly through expansion of mining and real estate into low‑lying hillocks, undermines the viability of species and increases human‑wildlife conflict.

Despite this significance, the Aravallis have suffered sustained degradation, largely driven by quarrying and associated land‑use change. Rajasthan and Haryana, in particular, have witnessed intensive extraction of limestone, marble, quartzite, and other stones, both legal and illegal, with hillocks flattened, deep pits left unreclaimed and forest cover drastically thinned. A Supreme Court‑appointed committee in 2018 found that 31 of 128 Aravalli hills in Rajasthan had effectively disappeared over fifty years due to quarrying, and that a dozen gaps had opened between Ajmer, Jhunjhunu, and Mahendergarh, permitting unhindered desert dust movement towards the east. In Haryana’s Charkhi Dadri and Bhiwani districts, licensed mining has reportedly devastated large segments of the ecosystem; in Gurugram, Nuh and Faridabad, extensive extraction preceded a 2009 Supreme Court ban, yet illegal operations have persisted. Groundwater levels have plummeted in many blocks, with borewells penetrating depths of more than 1,000–1,500 feet.

State governments have consistently framed mining as an economic necessity tied to revenue generation, employment, and infrastructure demands, especially in an era of rapid urbanisation and corridors like Delhi–Jaipur–Ahmedabad. At the same time, India’s commitments under the UN Convention to Combat Desertification, the Paris Agreement and domestic schemes on land degradation neutrality require halting and reversing the processes of erosion, deforestation and aquifer depletion that mining accelerates. The Aravallis thus became a quintessential site where development rhetoric, strategic mineral narratives, and environmental obligations collide.

II. From definitional vacuum to the 2025 Supreme Court ruling

The Supreme Court has been engaged with Aravalli‑related disputes for decades, mainly through the environmental public interest litigations M.C. Mehta v. Union of India (concerning mining in Haryana) and T.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad v. Union of India (a broader forest conservation matter within which Aravalli mining in Rajasthan has been monitored). In these proceedings, the Court issued orders restricting or banning mining in specific belts, demanded compliance with environmental clearances, and repeatedly admonished state authorities for failure to curb illegal extraction. Notably, in 2009, it imposed a blanket prohibition on mining in the Aravalli areas of Faridabad, Gurugram, and Nuh (then Mewat) owing to rampant violations.

However, a deeper structural issue persisted: the absence of a clear, uniform definition of what constitutes the “Aravalli Hills” and “Aravalli Range” across different states and regulatory regimes. Rajasthan had, as early as 2002, adopted a mining‑related definition that drew on landform classifications and treated features rising more than 100 metres above local relief as hills, but this was not uniformly replicated elsewhere. Haryana, for instance, lacked an official definition, and Delhi’s planning documents used their own criteria, such as “Natural Conservation Zones” in the National Capital Region plan.

During hearings in January 2024 in the Godavarman matter, the Court confronted concrete disputes about whether specific quarry clusters fell inside or outside the Aravallis under varying state criteria. This “definitional fog,” as legal analysts describe it, made it difficult to determine where mining could lawfully occur, hampering enforcement and enabling arbitrariness and illegal operations. On 10 January 2024, the Bench noted the need for uniformity and directed the Central Empowered Committee (CEC) to examine whether existing classifications should continue, while also suggesting that all Aravalli‑related mining cases be consolidated before a Special Bench.

On 9 May 2024, that Special Bench ordered the constitution of a multi‑agency committee under the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (MoEFCC), with representatives from the Forest Survey of India (FSI), CEC, Geological Survey of India, and the forest departments of Delhi, Haryana, Rajasthan, and Gujarat. The committee’s mandate was to propose a uniform definition of “Aravalli Hills” and “Aravalli Range” for mining regulation across all states. In the interim, states were allowed to process applications for leases and renewals but were barred from granting final mining permissions in Aravalli areas without Court approval, effectively imposing a moratorium of sorts.

The committee submitted its report in October 2025, proposing an elevation‑based definition: any landform with at least 100 metres of elevation above the local relief, as measured from the lowest contour line encircling it, would qualify as an “Aravalli hill,” and a group of such hills within 500 metres of each other would constitute an “Aravalli range.” Crucially, the report and the MoEFCC argued that all land within the encircling lowest contour, including hilltops, slopes and supporting terrain, would be treated as part of the hill, ostensibly guarding against fragmentary interpretations that excluded slopes from protection.

Senior Advocate K. Parameshwar, appointed amicus curiae, opposed this definition, favouring instead the earlier FSI approach that had considered multiple parameters: slope greater than 3 degrees, a 100‑metre foothill buffer and a 500‑metre inter‑hill spacing. He contended that a pure height threshold would ignore numerous low‑elevation hills and ridges that are ecologically integral to the continuity of the range, thereby weakening environmental safeguards and opening previously protected areas to mining and construction. Environmental groups pointed to FSI analyses suggesting that, of over 12,000 hills mapped in designated Aravalli districts, only about 1,048, roughly 8.7 per cent, would meet the 100‑metre elevation criterion. Internal assessments cited in media reports indicated that more than 90 per cent of the geomorphological features associated with the Aravallis could thus be excluded from the formal category of “hill” under the new rule.

In its November 20, 2025 judgment in “In Re: Issues relating to definition of Aravali Hills and Ranges,” the Supreme Court nevertheless accepted the committee’s proposal. The Bench comprising then Chief Justice B.R. Gavai and Justices K.V. Chandran and N.V. Anjaria held that the elevation‑based definition, when read together with the inclusive contour rule, offered a scientifically grounded and administratively workable standard applicable across all four states. It reasoned that this would provide clarity, avoid state‑wise discrepancies, and enable comprehensive, GIS‑based mapping to inform regulatory decisions.

At the same time, the Court was careful to situate this definitional move within a broader framework aimed at sustainable mining and environmental protection. Drawing upon its earlier decision in State of Bihar v. Pawan Kumar, where it had cautioned that blanket prohibitions could promote illegal mining and criminal networks, the Court rejected total bans as a general strategy. Instead, it directed that a Management Plan for Sustainable Mining (MPSM), to be prepared by MoEFCC with technical support from ICFRE and other agencies, should identify: (i) ecologically sensitive, conservation‑critical, and restoration‑priority areas where mining would be strictly prohibited; (ii) zones where limited, scientifically justified mining might be permissible; and (iii) detailed restoration and rehabilitation protocols for post‑mining landscapes. Until such an MPSM is finalised and approved, the Court ordered that no new mining leases or renewals be granted anywhere in the Aravalli hills and ranges as defined by the judgment, while allowing existing legal operations to continue under stringent monitoring and environmental conditions.

The judgment also set out a detailed list of “core/inviolate areas” where mining would be barred, including protected areas, tiger reserves and corridors, eco‑sensitive zones, Ramsar wetlands and notified wetlands with mandatory buffers, and critical aquifer recharge zones and dark groundwater blocks. It stressed that India’s international obligations under instruments like the UN Convention to Combat Desertification and its domestic policies on land degradation neutrality demanded robust protection and restoration of the Aravalli landscape.

This two‑track structure: adoption of a restrictive elevation‑based definition alongside a moratorium on new leases and a promise of landscape‑scale planning, lies at the heart of current debates. The Union government and MoEFCC portray the judgment as strengthening protection by clarifying boundaries, forbidding new leases pending the MPSM, and entrenching inviolate zones. Environmentalists, however, argue that once the mapping and MPSM are completed, the narrower definition will operate to legally “erase” large portions of the Aravallis from regulatory oversight, inviting medium‑ and long‑term incursions by mining, real estate, roads, and other projects.

III. Climate crisis, minerals, civil society, and the future of “Save Aravallis”

The Supreme Court’s ruling cannot be understood in isolation from wider climate and developmental pressures. The Aravalli range is already under multiple stressors: urban sprawl around Delhi–NCR, Gurugram, Jaipur, and Udaipur; industrial clusters; road and expressway construction; and the steady expansion of stone crushing and quarrying belts. The Union government’s own “Aravalli Green Wall” action plan acknowledges extensive degradation from deforestation, grazing, illegal encroachment, and mining, noting how these trends have exacerbated desertification and weakened the range’s ability to support wildlife and local livelihoods.

Climate models and empirical observations converge in highlighting the Aravallis’ role in buffering extreme events. Degraded forests and denuded hilltops no longer moderate wind speed or trap dust as effectively, contributing to more intense and frequent dust episodes in Delhi‑NCR and surrounding areas. With north India facing recurrent heatwaves, declining winter rainfall and prolonged dry spells, the loss of canopy cover and soil moisture in the Aravalli belt intensifies local heat islands and reduces resilience. Similarly, disruption of natural recharge processes, through cutting, blasting, and paving over slopes and foothills, directly threatens regional water security for both rural communities and rapidly growing urban centres like Gurugram, Faridabad, and Sohna.

Simultaneously, the Aravallis are increasingly framed as a repository of “critical minerals” essential to the energy transition and strategic sectors. Studies and official documents identify deposits of lead, zinc, copper, tungsten, gold, and a range of critical and strategic minerals such as tin, graphite, molybdenum, niobium, nickel, lithium, and rare earth elements within the broader Aravalli belt. India’s push for self‑reliance in clean‑energy technologies, high‑tech manufacturing and defence thus intersects with the geology of this fragile landscape. The Supreme Court judgment reflects this reality by allowing narrow exceptions for mining of atomic, critical, and strategic minerals even within zones otherwise marked as no‑go, subject to strict conditions and higher‑level approvals.

This intersection of climate vulnerability and mineral‑led development frames the politics of “Save Aravallis.” Civil society organisations, citizen‑scientist groups, and residents’ forums in Haryana, Rajasthan, Delhi and beyond have mobilised to highlight the ecological, climatic, and cultural stakes of the new definition, frequently organising campaigns, public reports, and petitions. Citizen reports, such as “The State of the Haryana Aravallis,” document in granular detail how licensed and illegal mining have transformed hillocks into craters, contaminated water, heightened dust loads, and undermined agriculture and health in nearby villages. Environmental journalists and legal scholars warn that once the 100‑metre elevation rule becomes embedded across regulatory processes, it could normalise the treatment of low‑lying ridge systems, scrub hills, and foothills as “non‑Aravalli,” making them more vulnerable to fragmentation and conversion.

Critics also draw attention to a shift in environmental jurisprudence. Earlier court orders and policy instruments, such as the 1992 MoEF Aravalli notification and the NCR Planning Board’s Natural Conservation Zones, tended to treat the entire Aravalli system as ecologically sensitive, irrespective of local elevation. The new approach, they argue, introduces a technocratic threshold that may be scientifically neat but ecologically reductive, given that climate, hydrology, and biodiversity depend on landscape connectivity and cumulative function rather than peak height alone.

From an environmental‑law perspective, the Supreme Court’s reliance on the precautionary principle and sustainable development is also being critically examined. While the Court emphasises that the MPSM must address cumulative impacts, ecological carrying capacity, and post‑mining restoration, much will depend on how the plan is drafted, who participates in its preparation, and whether it genuinely incorporates independent science and local knowledge. If the MPSM process is dominated by extractive priorities, the moratorium and high‑sounding language could yield to a new phase of “regulated degradation,” legitimising mining in zones that are ecologically important but legally downgraded. Conversely, a genuinely precautionary, landscape‑scale MPSM, with meaningful participation from ecologists, hydrologists, social scientists, and affected communities, could transform the judgment into an opportunity for long‑term ecological recovery, carefully circumscribed mining and robust restoration.

In this context, the “Save Aravallis” discourse is expanding beyond immediate legal battles to broader questions of environmental justice and intergenerational equity. The range’s spiritual associations, cultural memory, and role in sustaining marginal agrarian and pastoral populations complicate narratives that reduce it to an inert mineral stockpile or a mere backdrop to metropolitan development. Local resistance to mining in many pockets reflects not only concern for air, water, and livelihoods, but also a defence of place‑based identities and relationships with sacred groves, shrines, and landscapes.

The Supreme Court’s suo motu intervention has, in effect, redrawn the legal geography of the Aravallis at a moment when climate change, urban expansion and mineral demand make that geography more contested than ever. Its judgment acknowledges the enormous ecological and climatic importance of the range, mandates strong protection for core areas, and halts new mining leases pending a comprehensive plan. Yet by embracing a height‑based definition that excludes the vast majority of hill features and foothills, it simultaneously threatens to shrink the legally recognised Aravalli landscape in ways that may be difficult to reverse.

The future of “Save Aravallis” will therefore hinge less on definitional debates in isolation and more on how the MPSM is designed and implemented, how strictly inviolate zones are protected, how illegal mining is actually curbed, and whether climate‑vulnerability and groundwater security are placed at the centre rather than the margins of mineral and land‑use policy. For scholars, activists, and policymakers alike, the Aravalli controversy offers a stark illustration of how law, science, and power converge in the governance of ecological frontiers, and of how the survival of an ancient mountain range is entangled with the fate of millions who live in its shadow.

References:

Supreme Court of India (2025). In Re: Issue Relating to Definition of Aravali Hills and Ranges, Suo Motu proceedings in T.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad v. Union of India, Judgment dated 20 November 2025, Civil Writ Petition No. 202/1995. Available at: https://api.sci.gov.in/supremecourt/1995/2997/2997_1995_1_1502_66178_Judgement_20-Nov-2025.pdf
Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change, Government of India (PIB). Aravalli Hills: Protecting Ecology and Ensuring Sustainable Development (Factsheet). Available at: https://www.pib.gov.in/FactsheetDetails.aspx?id=150596&NoteId=150596&ModuleId=16&reg=3&lang=1
Drishti IAS. Protection of Aravalli Hills. Backgrounder on geography, ecology, threats and legal measures. Available at: https://www.drishtiias.com/daily-updates/daily-news-analysis/protection-of-aravalli-hills
Down To Earth. “Uniform definition of Aravallis accepted by Supreme Court will be catastrophic for India’s oldest mountain range.” Analysis of the 100‑metre rule, FSI data and ecological implications. Available at: https://www.downtoearth.org.in/forests/uniform-definition-of-aravallis-accepted-by-supreme-court-will-be-catastrophic-for-indias-oldest-mountain-range
Down To Earth. “Aravalli debate: Why the 100 metre rule has sparked fresh concerns.” Discussion of mining, landscape gaps and dust transport. Available at: https://www.downtoearth.org.in/mining/aravalli-debate-why-the-100-metre-rule-has-sparked-fresh-concerns
The Hindu. How is the Aravalli range to be protected? (Explained). Overview of the controversy, legal process and ecological stakes. Available at: https://www.thehindu.com/sci-tech/energy-and-environment/how-is-the-aravalli-range-to-be-protected-explained/article70408703.ece
The Leaflet. “How the Supreme Court’s new definition of the Aravalli redraws the landscape of India’s oldest hill range.” Legal analysis of the judgment and its implications. Available at: https://theleaflet.in/environment/how-the-supreme-courts-new-definition-of-the-aravalli-redraws-the-landscape-of-indias-oldest-hill-range
The Indian Express. “The great wall in the North: Why the Aravallis matter.” Geographical, ecological and climate significance of the Aravallis. Available at: https://indianexpress.com/article/explained/the-great-wall-in-the-north-why-the-aravallis-matter-10437728/
The Indian Express. “Aravalli benchmark could have effects beyond mining.” Discussion of how the definitional benchmark influences planning and land‑use. Available at: https://indianexpress.com/article/explained/aravalli-benchmark-could-have-effects-beyond-mining-10433763/
Frontline (The Hindu Group). Coverage on Aravalli hills, height, environment and mining‑related court proceedings. Article: “Mountain older than memory …” (title as given on site). Available at: https://frontline.thehindu.com/environment/aravalli-hills-height-environment-mining-court-case/article70426396.ece
The Hindu BusinessLine. “The controversy of redefining the Aravalli hills.” Report on policy–economy–environment linkages of the definitional change. Available at: https://www.thehindubusinessline.com/news/national/the-controversy-of-redefining-the-aravalli-hills/article70449152.ece
The Wire. “The Aravalli Hills have a new definition: Here’s why this is a problem.” Critical commentary on elevation‑based criteria and landscape loss. Available at: https://thewire.in/environment/the-aravalli-hills-have-a-new-definition-heres-why-this-is-a-problem
India Today. “Aravalli hills controversy explained: Government facts, claims, myths.” Overview of competing narratives about protection versus development. Available at: https://www.indiatoday.in/india/story/aravalli-hills-controversy-explained-government-facts-claims-myths-2840349-2025-12-23
NDTV. “Aravalli Hills controversy: What is the Aravalli Hills controversy?” and “Why Aravalli is in spotlight and what environmentalists demand.” News explainer and environmentalist demands. Available at:
https://www.ndtv.com/india-news/aravalli-hills-news-aravalli-hills-supreme-court-case-what-is-aravalli-hills-controversy-10095841
https://www.ndtv.com/india-news/explained-why-aravalli-is-in-spotlight-and-what-environmentalists-demand-9859854
Vision IAS. Blog: Save Aravalli Hills: Why protecting India’s oldest mountain range matters. UPSC‑oriented overview of ecology, threats and governance. Available at: https://visionias.in/blog/current-affairs/save-aravalli-hills-why-protecting-indias-oldest-mountain-range-matters
Vajiram & Ravi. Aravalli Range – Explained. Geography and environment background note. Available at: https://vajiramandravi.com/current-affairs/aravalli-range-explained/
InsightsonIndia. Aravalli Hills controversy. Current affairs note on the 100‑metre rule, Supreme Court stance and environmental concerns. Available at: https://www.insightsonindia.com/2025/12/24/aravalli-hills-controversy/
GKToday. “Aravalli Hills, critical minerals and the strategic exemption: Why India’s defence push has reignited an environmental fault line.” Available at: https://www.gktoday.in/aravalli-hills-critical-minerals-and-the-strategic-exemption-why-indias-defence-push-has-reignited-an-environmental-fault-line/
Land Conflict Watch. Environmental protection and local resistance in the Aravalli hills mining dispute. Case documentation on conflicts, local resistance and environmental impacts. Available at: https://www.landconflictwatch.org/conflicts/environmental-protection-and-local-resistance-in-the-aravalli-hills-mining-dispute
The Prayas India. Aravalli hills mining controversy. Competitive‑exam oriented analysis of the mining–environment conflict. Available at: https://theprayasindia.com/aravalli-hills-mining-controversy/
BBC News. Explainer article on the Aravalli controversy and new definition (as per your shared link). Available at: https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cn5ln4wee7wo
WION. “What’s the controversy on Aravalli Hills and why it matters more than you think.” News explainer on the national implications. Available at: https://www.wionews.com/india-news/wion-explains-what-s-the-controversy-on-aravalli-hills-and-why-it-matters-more-than-you-think-1766406433922
The Tribune / Dailyhunt link. “Decoding the Aravalli Hills controversy: What’s at stake.” Article summarising environmental and policy stakes. Available at: https://m.dailyhunt.in/news/india/english/thetribune-epaper-dhc3468c81fb3543a4828c7057b056a3f2/decoding+the+aravalli+hills+controversy+whats+at+stake-newsid-n694428830
Suganta. Blog article: “Aravalli controversy explained: Why experts fear for India’s ancient mountains.” Available at: https://www.suganta.com/blog/aravalli-controversy-explained-why-experts-fear-for-indias-ancient-mountains
Times of India. “Mountain older than memory: How new definition of Aravalli risks undercutting ‘Viksit Bharat’.” Discussion of definitional change, environment and development vision. Available at: https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/mountain-older-than-memory-how-new-definition-of-aravalli-risks-undercutting-viksit-bharat/articleshow/126103435.cms

Leave a Reply Cancel reply