SC puts November Aravalli judgment on hold, flags ecological concerns

In a suo motu move, the Supreme Court put its Aravalli judgment on hold, citing concerns over ecological continuity and mining regulation

PGurus Newsdesk

December 29, 2025

Bench orders comprehensive review of Aravalli definition, mining norms

Mapping exercise by Centre and states put on hold

The Supreme Court on Monday stayed its own November 20 judgment that had narrowed the definition of the Aravalli range to landforms rising at least 100 metres above the surrounding terrain, deciding to reopen and comprehensively re-examine how the ancient mountain range should be defined and regulated.

Taking up the matter suo motu, a bench led by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, along with Justices J.K. Maheshwari and Augustine George Masih, ordered that the earlier ruling be kept “in abeyance” until a detailed review is conducted with the assistance of domain experts. The bench said it was considering the constitution of a high-powered expert committee to assess issues related to ecological continuity, the elevation-based definition, and permissible mining in the region.

“We feel that a fair, impartial and independent opinion of the issues involved is required. Some clarifications have to come,” the Chief Justice observed during the hearing, which followed growing criticism of the November verdict.

The interim stay is expected to halt the mapping and delineation exercise initiated by the Union environment ministry and state governments, which had begun identifying Aravalli areas strictly based on the 100-metre elevation criterion. That exercise was meant to form the basis for future mining decisions and a proposed Management Plan for Sustainable Mining.

Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the Union government, welcomed the suo motu proceedings and said there were “several misconceptions” about the November judgment. He told the court that the earlier ruling had accepted an expert committee’s report and had envisaged a detailed mining plan to be prepared by specialists, subject to Supreme Court approval. Mehta also said the Centre intended to hold public consultations before finalising any mining framework.

The bench, however, flagged several concerns arising from a purely height-based definition of the Aravallis. These included whether such a definition significantly narrows the conservation area, expands zones where mining could be permitted, and creates regulatory gaps between hill formations that meet the elevation threshold.

“For instance, if there are two areas of 100 metres and above, what about a gap of 700 metres between them?” the bench asked, highlighting the risk of fragmenting a continuous ecological system.

The court also raised questions about preserving the ecological continuity and structural integrity of one of the world’s oldest mountain ranges, and whether a broader reassessment would be needed to avoid a regulatory vacuum that could enable unregulated mining.

In view of these unresolved issues, the bench proposed forming a high-powered committee of experts to analyse the earlier report and assist the court in evolving a more holistic framework. At the Solicitor General’s request, the court directed the Union government to file its response first before finalising the panel’s composition.

Notices were issued to the Union government, the Aravalli states, and senior advocate Parameshwar, who had earlier assisted the court as amicus curiae. The Solicitor General and the Attorney General will assist the bench in the proceedings.

“In the interim, we direct that the recommendations of the committee and the findings of the Supreme Court thereafter shall remain in abeyance,” the bench said, posting the matter for further hearing on January 21, 2026.

The suo motu proceedings were initiated amid criticism from environmentalists and conservationists, who warned that the elevation-based definition excluded vast stretches of smaller hills, ridges, and undulating terrain that form part of the Aravallis’ continuous geological and ecological system. With the November ruling now stayed, the delineation process is expected to remain on hold until the Supreme Court settles the definition question.

For all the latest updates, download PGurus App.