Defining the Aravallis: Judicial Intervention
India’s environmental jurisprudence has consistently reflected the Hon’ble Supreme Court’s role as a constitutional sentinel safeguarding natural resources. From the Ganga pollution cases to air-quality litigation on stubble burning, the Court has repeatedly intervened when ecological degradation threatens public health and inter-generational equity. The recent proceedings concerning the Aravalli Hills are a continuation of this tradition, addressing the urgent need to protect one of India’s most ecologically significant and fragile landscapes.
Ecological Significance of The Aravalli Range
The Aravalli Range is among the oldest mountain ranges in the world, dating back nearly two billion years to the Precambrian era. The range stretches approximately 670-700 km southwest from Delhi through Haryana, Rajasthan, and Gujarat, ending near Ahmedabad, and plays a critical role in India’s environmental balance. It acts as a natural barrier preventing the eastward expansion of the Thar Desert, regulates rainfall patterns, and facilitates groundwater recharge in north-western India. The region supports rich biodiversity, housing 22 wildlife sanctuaries and several tiger reserves, alongside sustaining agriculture and forest-based livelihoods. However, decades of illegal mining, unregulated construction, and deforestation, often undertaken without proper Environmental Impact Assessments (EIAs), have severely weakened this ecological shield. The thinning and fragmentation of the Aravallis have contributed to desertification trends, reduced rainfall, and worsening air pollution in Delhi and surrounding regions.
Earlier Interventions by the Government for the Protection of the Aravalli Range
Recognising the growing ecological crisis, the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (MoEF&CC) imposed restrictions on mining in the Aravalli region during the 1990s. However, weak enforcement by State authorities diluted their effectiveness. In 2002, a Committee Report of the State Government adopted the “100-metre elevation above local relief” criterion to identify Aravalli hills, leading to restrictions on mining in such areas and their supporting slopes.
Judicial scrutiny intensified in 2009, when the Hon’ble Supreme Court imposed a blanket ban on mining in environmentally sensitive districts such as Faridabad, Mewat, and Gurugram. By 2024, continuing degradation prompted the Court to re-examine the issue, directing the Central Empowered Committee (CEC) to conduct scientific mapping and recommend sustainable mining practices. The Court also supported initiatives such as the Aravalli Green Wall Project, aimed at restoring over 1.1 million hectares of degraded forest land, inspired by Africa’s Great Green Wall.
November 2025 Judgment: Uniform Definition and Its Fallout
Hon’ble Supreme Court bench led by then Chief Justice B.R. Gavai vide its order dated 20.11.2025, accepted a uniform definition of the Aravalli Hills for mining regulation: - “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…”
According to this definition, only landforms rising 100 metres or more above local relief would qualify as Aravalli hills. The definition of Aravalli range was also accepted whereby the Aravalli range would exist where two such hills are within the proximity of 500 metres of each other. While intended to resolve inconsistencies across States, the definition triggered widespread concern. Environmental experts and civil society groups argued that this threshold excluded nearly 90% of the Aravalli landscape, potentially legitimising mining in previously protected areas. Protests followed, with apprehensions that the definition diluted decades of environmental protection and opened regulatory loopholes.
Corrective Order of 29th December, 2025
Responding to these concerns, the Hon’ble Supreme Court, on 29 December 2025, in a suo motu proceeding titled “In Re: Definition of Aravalli Hills and Ranges and Ancillary Issues”, kept its earlier directions in abeyance. A vacation Bench comprising of Chief Justice Surya Kant, Justice J.K. Maheshwari, and Justice Augustine George Masih observed that there was a rising concern among environmentalists that the new definition could potentially be misinterpreted and improperly implemented.
The Court emphasised that before implementation of the Committee Report and directions contained in the order dated 20.11.2025, a fair, impartial, and independent expert opinion must be obtained and considered. It stated that issues such as whether the definition created a structural paradox, whether mining could be permitted in the gaps between hills, and whether excluding thousands of lower-elevation hills would compromise the ecological continuity of the Aravalli range needed to be addressed. Noting that only 1,048 out of 12,081 hills met the 100-metre criterion, the Court proposed the constitution of a high-powered expert committee to holistically reassess the issue.
The Hon’ble Supreme Court issued notice to the Union of India and the States of NCT of Delhi, Rajasthan, Haryana and Gujarat. It further directed that recommendations submitted by the Committee, together with the findings and directions stipulated by this Court in its judgment dated 20.11.2025, be kept in abeyance. It also held that the said stay shall remain in effect until the present proceedings reach a state of logical finality. It further held that until further orders are passed, no permission shall be granted for mining, whether it is for new mining leases or renewal of old mining leases, in the ‘Aravalli Hills and Ranges’ as defined in the FSI Report dated 25.08.2010 without prior permission from the Hon’ble Supreme Court.
About the Author:
Shreyansh Singh is a final year law student at Symbiosis Law School, NOIDA, and an assessment intern at Pratap & Co.