90% of Aravalli at Risk? Supreme Court’s 100-Metre Definition Sparks National Alarm

 The Supreme Court of India, on 20 November 2025, accepted a new uniform definition of the Aravalli Hills and Range based on recommendations from a committee under the Union Environment Ministry, which stated that an “Aravalli Hill” should be defined as any landform with an elevation of 100 metres or more above the local relief, and that an “Aravalli Range” consists of at least two such hills within 500 metres of each other. This criterion was intended to bring clarity to how the Aravalli system is legally identified across multiple states including Rajasthan, Haryana, Delhi and Gujarat, especially for regulating mining and land use. The court also directed the government to undertake scientific mapping and prepare a sustainable mining plan, and temporarily halted the issuance of new mining leases until the mapping process is complete. 

However, environmentalists, scientists, civil society groups and local communities have expressed strong concerns about this 100-metre benchmark. Critics argue that most of the Aravalli range consists of lower ridges, hillocks and slopes that do not reach 100 metres but play a critical ecological role in maintaining the region’s environment. According to data from the Forest Survey of India (FSI), only about 8.7 % of the mapped Aravalli hills meet the 100-metre threshold, meaning over 90 % of the range — including ecologically important lower formations — could be excluded from the official definition and legal protection. �

This has triggered widespread public outcry and protests, particularly in Rajasthan where activists, residents and political leaders have rallied under campaigns like #SaveAravalli demanding stronger protection for the entire mountain system and its surrounding ecosystems. Demonstrations have taken place in cities such as Jaipur and Gurugram, with protestors warning that excluding lower hills from the definition could pave the way for renewed mining, construction and commercial exploitation of previously safeguarded areas. Opponents say that such changes would severely damage groundwater recharge zones, biodiversity habitats, and natural barriers that block sand and dust from the Thar Desert, potentially worsening air pollution, desertification, and water scarcity in the Delhi-NCR region and beyond. 

Experts also warn that focusing solely on elevation oversimplifies a complex ancient fold mountain system. The Aravalli range, one of the world’s oldest mountain chains, supports wildlife corridors, village commons, recharge zones and forest cover that do not necessarily depend on high elevation alone but are essential for ecological stability. Removing protection from these lower features, they argue, amounts to a “slow deletion” of the natural shield keeping northern India’s climate and water systems balanced. 

On the other side, Union Environment Minister Bhupender Yadav has defended the new definition, stating that the criterion will not relax mining rules and that protections will remain in place for core ecological zones. He emphasised that mining will be regulated and only permitted after detailed scientific studies, and that only a small fraction — around 2 % — of the Aravalli region might be opened for such activities once proper safeguards are established. 

In summary, the Supreme Court’s endorsement of the 100-metre definition — although aimed at uniform classification — has sparked a significant debate. Many fear that legal exclusion of most of the low-lying hills could weaken environmental safeguards, trigger expanded mining and development, and impair the Aravalli range’s long-standing role in protecting the region’s ecology and climate.