The Supreme Court of India is set to hear its long-pending suo motu proceedings concerning critical issues surrounding the definition, extent, and legal protection of the Aravalli Hills—one of the country’s oldest mountain ranges and a vital ecological barrier against desertification in northern India.
The matter assumes renewed significance amid continuing disputes between environmental protection imperatives and mineral extraction activities across parts of Rajasthan, Haryana, and the National Capital Region (NCR).
Background of the Suo Motu Case
The suo motu case was initiated by the Supreme Court to address ambiguities and inconsistencies in how the Aravalli Hills are defined and notified under various state laws, revenue records, forest classifications, and environmental regulations. These inconsistencies have led to enforcement challenges, conflicting judicial orders, and allegations of unchecked mining operations causing irreversible ecological damage.
The Aravalli range plays a crucial role in maintaining groundwater levels, preventing soil erosion, and acting as a natural barrier against the expansion of the Thar Desert. Environmental experts have long warned that degradation of the Aravallis could exacerbate air pollution, water scarcity, and climate vulnerability in the NCR.
Earlier Supreme Court Observations on Mining Ban
In earlier proceedings, the Supreme Court had declined to impose a blanket ban on mining activities across the Aravalli region. The Court observed that a complete prohibition, without nuanced regulation, could be counterproductive and may inadvertently fuel illegal and unregulated mining.
The apex court had noted that when lawful mining is entirely barred, it often drives operations underground, weakening regulatory oversight and enabling environmental violations. Instead, the Court had indicated the need for a balanced approach—one that ensures strict environmental compliance, scientific assessment, and effective monitoring, rather than an absolute embargo.
Core Issue: Defining the Aravallis
A central issue before the Court is the lack of a uniform and legally binding definition of what constitutes the “Aravalli Hills.” Different government agencies rely on varying criteria—such as geological features, elevation, forest records, or historical revenue classifications—resulting in confusion over the applicability of mining restrictions and conservation laws.
Environmental groups argue that narrow or fragmented definitions allow mining activities to continue in ecologically sensitive zones under technical loopholes. On the other hand, state governments and mining stakeholders have contended that overbroad interpretations could unfairly halt legitimate economic activity and development.
Environmental Concerns and Regulatory Gaps
The Court is also expected to examine allegations that mining in and around the Aravallis has continued in violation of environmental clearances, forest conservation norms, and court-imposed safeguards. Reports of groundwater depletion, loss of biodiversity, and air pollution have repeatedly surfaced, particularly in areas adjoining Gurugram, Faridabad, Alwar, and parts of Jaipur.
The proceedings may also assess the effectiveness of existing regulatory frameworks, including the role of state pollution control boards, forest departments, and district administrations in monitoring compliance.
Possible Directions from the Apex Court
Legal experts anticipate that the Supreme Court may consider issuing comprehensive directions to bring clarity and uniformity to the definition of the Aravalli Hills. This could include mandating a scientific and geological assessment, harmonising state and central records, and laying down clear guidelines for permissible and prohibited activities.
The Court may also revisit the regulatory framework governing mining in ecologically sensitive areas, emphasizing transparent approvals, continuous monitoring, and strict penalties for violations.
