In a significant development concerning environmental protection, the Supreme Court on Monday stayed the operation of its own judgment passed last month regarding the definition of the Aravalli Hills. The apex court observed that the parameters set for defining the mountain range—which directly impact mining regulations—require a comprehensive study by environmental experts rather than a committee primarily composed of bureaucrats.
A bench comprising Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant and Justices JK Maheshwari and AG Masih passed the order in a suo motu case. The intervention comes amidst widespread protests and concerns that the definitions accepted in the previous ruling could strip protection from vast swathes of the ecologically fragile range, potentially exposing them to mining activities.
Key Developments
The Bench issued a directive effectively suspending the legal force of both the recommendations made by the earlier committee and the Supreme Court’s subsequent findings based on those inputs. The Court mandated that the previous ruling would remain inoperative until further orders, ensuring the status quo is maintained while a new assessment is conducted.
Highlighting the need for scientific rigor, the bench opined that an expert committee must now evaluate the environmental impact of the recommendations. The matter has been listed for the next hearing on January 21, 2026.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the Union government, addressed the bench to clarify the administration’s position. He submitted that significant misunderstandings had arisen regarding the court’s previous orders and the role of the government. Mehta explained that the earlier ruling was grounded in a report from a constituted expert committee, which the court had previously found acceptable.
Context: The Controversy Over Definition
The stay order addresses a ruling dated November 20, passed by a bench of then CJI BR Gavai and Justices K Vinod Chandran and NV Anjaria. That judgment had accepted an “elevation-linked definition” for the Aravallis.
Under the November guidelines, landforms were to be classified as Aravalli Hills only if they met specific criteria:
- Elevation: 100 meters or more from the local relief.
- Proximity: Two or more hills located within 500 meters of each other.
Reports indicated that strictly applying this definition would exclude over 90 percent of the Aravalli range from being classified as forest or protected land for mining purposes. This potential exclusion sparked fears of unchecked ecological degradation across the range, which spans Delhi, Haryana, Rajasthan, and Gujarat.
Background
The issue traces back to May 2024, when the Supreme Court, dealing with illegal mining matters, stressed the need to properly define the Aravalli range after noting that different states had adopted varying definitions.
A committee was subsequently formed and submitted its report in October, suggesting measures to preserve the hills while regulating mining. The November 20 judgment had accepted these recommendations, with the previous bench reasoning that a complete ban on mining often counterproductively leads to the rise of illegal mining mafias and criminalisation.
However, Monday’s order by the bench led by CJI Surya Kant effectively pauses the implementation of these definitions, prioritizing a reassessment of the environmental consequences before any final classification is cemented.
