100-metre Aravalli hill definition ignored ecology, Supreme Court informed
The Supreme Court of India has been informed that a government panel tasked with defining the Aravalli Hills allegedly suppressed an important report by the Forest Survey of India (FSI) while recommending the controversial 100-metre height definition for the hill range.
Senior Advocate K. Parameshwar, appointed as Amicus Curiae in the matter, told the court that the earlier committee — led by the Environment Secretary — defined the Aravalli hills solely on the basis of elevation, without adequately considering the FSI’s opinion on the ecological significance of lower-lying hills.
According to the Amicus report, the Director General of the Forest Survey of India had sent an email on October 7, 2025, expressing disagreement with the 100-metre definition and suggesting an alternative approach.
The report also stated that the FSI had submitted a detailed study on September 22, 2025 to the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (MoEFCC), emphasising the ecological importance of hills of varying heights. However, the Amicus alleged that this report was “completely suppressed” in the ministry’s affidavit filed before the court on October 13, 2025.
“The committee defined the ‘Aravalli Hills’ solely on the basis of height, disregarding the FSI’s opinion as to the importance of lower-lying hills,” the submission noted.
The Amicus has now recommended that the Indian Council of Forestry Research and Education (ICFRE) and the Forest Survey of India conduct fresh surveys of the entire Aravalli geomorphological region. The proposed exercise would identify ecological corridors and groundwater aquifers across the range.
In a related development, the Amicus also informed the court that the Central Empowered Committee (CEC) had stated in a letter dated October 14, 2025 that the Aravalli committee’s report was never placed before it for approval.
The report further argued that the 100-metre definition fails to include many landforms that make up the Aravalli system. Focusing only on isolated hills could fragment the range and potentially open more areas for mining, it said.
Lower-lying hills, valleys and flat stretches are critical parts of the Aravalli ecosystem and play a major role in preventing desertification and recharging groundwater. The Amicus noted that the region has the potential to recharge nearly two million litres of groundwater per hectare.
The Supreme Court had earlier accepted the panel’s recommendation on November 20, 2025, stating that any landform rising at least 100 metres above local relief would be considered part of the Aravalli hills.
However, following widespread public criticism, a bench led by Chief Justice Surya Kant later took suo motu cognisance of the issue in December 2025 and stayed the earlier order.
The court also called for the formation of a fresh expert committee to revisit the definition and appointed Parameshwar as Amicus Curiae to assist in the case.
In his written submissions dated February 24, the Amicus also highlighted that the hydrological features of the Aravalli region were not adequately considered in the earlier recommendation.
He emphasised that the Aravalli range stretches across four states and forms a single contiguous ecosystem, arguing that any conservation strategy should address the entire geographical system rather than focusing only on definitions tailored for mining operations.
For all the latest updates, download PGurus App.
