Unrest has flared across northern India after the Supreme Court redefined the Aravalli hills – among the planet's most ancient geological formations stretching across the states of Rajasthan, Haryana, Gujarat, and Delhi.
As per the revised criteria, approved by the court based on central government recommendations, an Aravalli hill is any landform rising at least 100 metres (328 ft) from the adjacent land. Two or more such hills within 500 metres of each other, along with the land between them, are deemed to be an Aravalli range.
Environmentalists argue that defining Aravalli hills by height could leave many shorter, vegetation-clad but ecologically critical hills vulnerable to mining and construction.
The federal government, on the other hand, says that the new definition is intended to strengthen regulation and establish consistency and not weaken safeguards.
The Roots of the Unrest
Over the past few days, peaceful protests were held in cities such as Gurugram and Udaipur, organized by local residents, farmers, green activists, and, at times, lawyers and political parties.
An organizing member of a key conservation collective stated that the new definition threatens to compromise the critical role of the Aravalli range in "preventing desertification, replenishing aquifers and protecting livelihoods" in northwest India.
The shorter, vegetated hills perform a crucial function in stopping desert creep, boosting water tables and sustaining communities as per experts.
"This mountain system must not be categorized solely by elevation, but by its ecological, geological and climatic function," said an environmental activist involved in the campaign to preserve the Aravallis.
He said that, internationally, mountains and hill systems are classified by the roles they play, not by arbitrary elevation thresholds.
"Any landform that is structurally a component of the Aravalli system and serves a vital purpose in ecology or combating desertification must be acknowledged as a component of the system, irrespective of its height."
Activists are demanding that the government define Aravalli areas using research-based parameters, encompassing geography, ecology, animal corridors and environmental durability.
One activist warned that the court's new definition could encourage mining, construction and commercial activity, heightening the threat of environmental harm.
Political opponents have stepped up criticism, cautioning that the new definition might lead to serious ecological damage.
A senior politician said that protecting the Aravallis is "fundamentally linked to Delhi's survival." Another leader described the range the state's "life-support system," stating that without it, "a vast region up to Delhi would have turned into a desert."
Official Position
India's federal government has sought to downplay these concerns.
In a recent statement, it asserted the new definition is meant to bolster governance and create standardization, adding that a single, objective definition was required to regulate mining uniformly across states.
It added that the new definition encompasses the whole mountainous region – incorporating slopes, associated landforms, and intervening areas – clearly safeguarding hill clusters and their connections.
The federal environment ministry clarified it is incorrect to assume that mining will be allowed on all landforms under 100 metres.
The government states areas within the Aravalli hills or ranges are not eligible for new mining leases, while existing ones can continue if they adhere to environmentally sound practices.
It noted that mining remains prohibited in core "inviolate" areas – protected forests, eco-sensitive zones, and wetlands – except for certain critical, strategic, and atomic minerals permitted by law.
The minister responsible for ecology indicated only about 2% of the vast Aravalli range could potentially be mined, and only after detailed studies and official approval.
Nevertheless, several of the demonstrating organizations contend that demonstrations will continue and that they are exploring judicial avenues to contest the court's new definition.
