Demonstrations have broken out across the northern part of the country after the Supreme Court redefined the Aravalli hills – one of the world's oldest mountain ranges stretching across the states of Rajasthan, Haryana, Gujarat, and the capital territory.
Under the new definition, endorsed by the court following central government recommendations, an Aravalli hill is any geographical feature with a minimum elevation of 100 metres (328 ft) from the adjacent land. A cluster of such hills within 500 metres of each other, combined with the land between them, are deemed to be an Aravalli range.
Environmentalists argue that defining Aravalli hills based on elevation risks leaving many lower, scrub-covered but ecologically critical hills unprotected from quarrying and development.
The central administration, on the other hand, states that the new definition is intended to strengthen regulation and establish consistency and not dilute safeguards.
What is Sparking the Demonstrations?
Over the past few days, peaceful protests took place in cities including Gurugram and Udaipur, organized by local residents, farmers, environmental activists, and, at times, lawyers and political parties.
A founder member of a key environmental group commented that the new definition risks undermining the critical role of the Aravalli range in "halting desert expansion, recharging groundwater and protecting livelihoods" in the northwestern region.
The lower, scrub-covered hills perform a crucial function in stopping desert creep, boosting water tables and sustaining communities according to experts.
"This mountain system must not be categorized solely by elevation, but by its environmental, physical and weather-related role," noted an environmental activist associated with the movement to preserve the Aravallis.
He added that, internationally, mountains and hill systems are identified by the functions they perform, not by random height benchmarks.
"Any landform that is geologically part of the Aravalli system and plays a critical role in ecology or preventing desertification should be recognised as a component of the system, irrespective of its height."
Protesters are calling for that the government delineate Aravalli areas using scientific criteria, encompassing geography, ecology, animal corridors and climate resilience.
A campaigner cautioned that the court's new definition could encourage extractive industries, development and business projects, heightening the threat of ecological damage.
Opposition parties have stepped up criticism, cautioning that the new definition could cause significant environmental degradation.
A senior politician said that safeguarding the Aravallis is "fundamentally linked to Delhi's survival." Another leader called the range the state's "life-support system," adding that without it, "the entire area up to Delhi would have turned into a desert."
What Does the Government Say?
India's federal government has attempted to minimize these concerns.
In a recent communication, it asserted the new definition is intended to bolster governance and bring uniformity, noting that a clear, unambiguous definition was required to oversee extraction consistently across states.
It added that the new definition covers the entire hill system – incorporating slopes, related features, and intervening areas – clearly safeguarding hill clusters and their linkages.
The national environment department clarified it is incorrect to assume that mining will be allowed on all landforms under 100 metres.
The government says areas within the Aravalli hills or ranges are not eligible for new mining leases, while current operations can continue if they follow sustainable mining norms.
It noted that mining remains banned in core "inviolate" areas – reserved woodlands, environmentally fragile zones, and wetlands – aside from certain essential, national security, and nuclear minerals permitted by law.
The minister responsible for ecology indicated only about 2% of the 147,000 sqkm Aravalli range might be open to extraction, and only after detailed studies and formal clearance.
Nevertheless, many of the protesting groups contend that protests will persist and that they are exploring legal options to challenge the court's new definition.
