Supreme Court Takes Suo Motu Cognisance of 'Aravalli Hills' Definition Dispute, Stays Own Order

Amid growing controversy over the definition of the Aravalli Hills, the Supreme Court on Monday took suo motu cognisance of the matter and heard the case on December 29, 2025. A three-judge Bench headed by Chief Justice of India Justice Suryakant, and comprising Justices J.K. Maheshwari and Augustine George Masih, framed five key questions for consideration and stayed its own earlier order for the time being.

Earlier, on November 20, the Supreme Court had approved a uniform and scientific definition of the Aravalli Hills and ranges and imposed a ban on the grant of new mining leases across the Aravalli region spanning Delhi, Haryana, Rajasthan, and Gujarat, until expert reports were submitted. The Court has now scheduled the next hearing in the matter for January 21, 2026.

The earlier order had accepted the recommendations of a committee formed by the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (MoEF&CC), which stressed the urgent need for a clear and scientific definition to protect one of the world’s oldest mountain ranges. According to the committee, any landform with a height of 100 metres or more above ground level in the Aravalli districts would be classified as an Aravalli hill. Two or more such hills located within a 500-metre radius would collectively constitute an Aravalli range.

The committee further clarified that associated slopes, adjoining land, and related landforms, irrespective of gradient, would also be considered part of the Aravalli ecosystem. Similarly, areas lying between two qualifying hills would fall under the Aravalli range, subject to prescribed parameters.

The matter is linked to the long-pending T.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad case, in which the Supreme Court had delivered a detailed 29-page judgment. The Court had prohibited mining in core and inviolate zones, while allowing limited exceptions as outlined in the committee’s report. It had also approved recommendations aimed at promoting sustainable mining practices and curbing illegal mining activities. Authorities were directed to identify zones where mining would be completely prohibited and areas where it could be permitted strictly on scientific and environmental grounds.

During Monday’s hearing, the CJI-led Bench proposed the formation of a high-powered expert committee to re-examine the earlier report. Notices were issued to the Centre, concerned state governments, and the amicus curiae. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta and the Attorney General were requested to assist the Court. The Chief Justice clarified that the committee’s recommendations and the Court’s conclusions based on them would remain in abeyance for now.

The Bench also framed five critical questions, including whether limiting the definition of the Aravalli range to a 500-metre radius creates a structural contradiction that narrows the scope of conservation; whether it inadvertently expands non-Aravalli areas where regulated mining could be permitted; and how ecological continuity of the mountain range can be preserved. The Court also questioned whether gaps of 700 metres between two qualifying hills should allow controlled mining and whether a detailed reassessment is required to maintain the structural integrity of the Aravalli range in case of legal or regulatory loopholes.

Chief Justice Suryakant emphasised the need for an impartial and independent expert opinion before implementing any report or judicial directions, noting that such guidance was essential to determine whether the definition had led to unintended consequences, facilitating unchecked mining.

Reacting to the development, former Rajasthan Chief Minister Ashok Gehlot welcomed the Supreme Court’s intervention, remarking that “the vehicle that had gone off track will now return to the right path.” He congratulated all those associated with the campaign to protect the Aravalli ecosystem.

The controversy had intensified following sustained opposition to the Supreme Court’s earlier ruling. Environmental activist and lawyer Hitesh Gandhi had written to the CJI, with a copy sent to the President, seeking a review of the 100-metre height criterion. He argued that many ecologically significant formations could be excluded from protection despite their environmental importance.

Meanwhile, the Court had also directed the Union Government to prepare a comprehensive Management Plan for Sustainable Mining before permitting any new mining activity in the ecologically sensitive Aravalli region.

Also Read: Aravalli Hills Redefinition: Supreme Court Initiates Suo Motu Case