SC puts its own ruling on Aravalli redefining in abeyance
Forms new panel, says key issues need to be clarified
Noting that certain clarifications were needed regarding the definition of Aravalli Hills it recently approved, the Supreme Court on Monday ordered to keep in abeyance its November 20 ruling that was based on a committee’s recommendations.
A three-judge special vacation Bench led by CJI Surya Kant decided to set up a new high-powered committee of domain experts to examine the environmental impact of the recommendations made by the earlier committee. The composition of the new panel has not been announced.
The Bench noted that there had been a significant outcry among environmentalists, who had expressed profound concern about the potential for misinterpretation and improper implementation of the newly adopted definition and this court’s directions. It said, “This public dissent and criticism appear to stem from the perceived ambiguity and lack of clarity in certain terms and 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.”
“While we have no scientific reasons justifying any ex-facie acceptance of the same, it seems prima facie that both the committee’s report and the judgment of this court have omitted to expressly clarify certain critical issues,” said the Bench, which also included Justice JK Maheshwari and Justice AG Masih.
It said, “In the interim, to subserve the ends of complete justice and in the broader public interest, we deem it necessary to direct that the recommendations submitted by the committee, together with the findings and directions stipulated by this court in its judgment dated November 20, 2025, be kept in abeyance.
“This stay shall remain in effect until the present proceedings reach a state of logical finality, ensuring that no irreversible administrative or ecological actions are taken based on the current framework.
“We therefore deem it appropriate that prior to the implementation of the committee’s report, or the execution of the directions contained in paragraph 50 of this court’s judgment, a fair, impartial and 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 issues (relating to the definition of the ‘Aravalli Hills and Ranges’).”
As a matter of abundant caution, the Bench directed that “until further orders, 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 (Forest Survey of India) report dated August 25, 2010, without prior permission from this court.”
Issuing a notice to the Centre and governments of Haryana, Rajasthan, Gujarat and Delhi, the top court posted the matter for further hearing on January 21, 2026. It urged Attorney General R Venkataramani, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, senior advocate and amicus curiae K Parmeswar and the Central Empowered Committee (CEC) to assist it on various issues concerning the hills.
Often described as the ‘green lungs’ of north western India, the Aravallis have for centuries sustained diverse ecosystems and underpinned the livelihoods of numerous communities. “It serves as indispensable ecological and socio-economic backbone of the region, functioning as the primary geographical barrier separating the arid north western desert from the fertile northern plains,” the Bench noted.
The top court had last month approved an elevation-linked definition for classifying landforms as part of the Aravalli range — spanning across Delhi, Haryana, Rajasthan and Gujarat — for the purpose of mining regulation.
However, following widespread apprehensions about ecological degradation due to unregulated mining in the Aravali Hills, the Supreme Court took suo motu cognisance of issues concerning its definition last week and urgently took up the matter on Monday.
Environmental activists expressed serious concerns over the revised definition of the Aravalli hills, saying dilution of the definition could legitimise mining and construction activities in hitherto protected areas.
