5 min readNew DelhiJun 3, 2026 01:57 PM IST
The Supreme Court has set up a five-member high-powered committee (HPC) with the director general of the Indian Council of Forestry Research and Education (ICFRE) as the ex-officio chairperson to examine the definition of Aravallis, which limits the hills to landforms at an elevation of 100 metres or more.
The other members of the HPC are Subhash Ashutosh, ex-director general, Forest Survey of India; Rajendra Kumar Sharma, director (retd.), Geological Survey of India; Brij Mohan Singh Rathore, former joint secretary, Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change and Ashok K Bhatnagar, former professor and head of botany at Delhi University.
Jagdish Krishnaswamy, Dean, School of Environment and Sustainability, Indian Institute for Human Settlements, and Laxmikant Sharma, Professor, Central University of Haryana, will serve as special invitees.
A bench of Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and Vipul M Pancholi directed the committee to submit its comprehensive report before August 31.
As per the May 25 order, which was made available on Tuesday, the HPC will examine “whether the definition of the ‘Aravalli Hills and Ranges’, restricted exclusively to the 500-meter area between two or more Aravalli Hills, creates a structural paradox wherein the geographical scope of protected territory is significantly narrowed”.
It will also look into “whether this restrictive demarcation has inversely broadened the scope of ‘non-Aravalli’ areas, thereby facilitating the continuation of unregulated mining and other disruptive activities in terrains that are ecologically contiguous but technically excluded by this definition”.
The HPC will consider “whether the Aravalli Hills, characterized by an elevation of 100 meters and above, constitute a contiguous ecological formation even when the intervening distance exceeds the stipulated 500- meter threshold” and clarify “whether regulated mining would be permissible in these gaps. If so, what precise spatial parameters or lateral width would be utilised to define the extent of the ‘Aravalli Range’ to ensure that ecological continuity is not compromised”.
Story continues below this ad
It will also examine “whether the widely publicised criticism asserting that only 1,048 hills out of 12,081 in Rajasthan meet the 100-meter elevation threshold, thereby stripping the remaining lower ranges of environmental protection, is factually and scientifically accurate”.
A definition sparks a controversy
In November 2025, the Supreme Court had accepted the definition of the Aravallis as proposed by a committee constituted by the government on its orders. According to this definition, only peaks that are 100 metres or above would be considered as Aravallis.
The decision sparked a controversy, after which the Supreme Court on December 29, 2025, directed that the November decision “be kept in abeyance” till an HPC of domain experts undertakes a comprehensive assessment of the report of the earlier committee and sought proposals from all stakeholders on who should be part of the committee.
Perusing the recommendations, the Supreme Court said the committee is necessary “to ensure that the issues…are examined by subject-matter experts possessing the requisite technical knowledge and expertise, particularly in light of the fragile ecosystem and rich biodiversity of the Aravalli Hills and Ranges.”
Story continues below this ad
The bench also emphasised that “decisions of such far-reaching consequence ought not to be taken without the benefit of expert evaluation”. It said the proposed committee would be expected to “objectively assess the implications of the measures contemplated” and assist the court in determining “whether their implementation may give rise to ecological, environmental, or other consequences that may subsequently prove difficult, if not impossible, to reverse”.
“Such an exercise is essential to ensure that any course of action adopted is informed, scientifically sound, and consistent with the principles of environmental protection and sustainable development,” the court said.
“It is important, and indeed imperative, that the proposed committee comprise experts possessing diverse and multidisciplinary expertise across a broad spectrum of relevant fields. Such a composition is essential to ensure that every aspect bearing upon the issue is comprehensively examined, including, inter alia, the geological and soil characteristics of the region, its biodiversity, flora and fauna, mineral wealth and natural resources, as well as the scientific and accurate geo-mapping of the Aravalli Hills and Ranges,” it added.
The court further said that “a holistic assessment of these interconnected factors is thus indispensable for arriving at an informed and balanced determination. Above all, such an exercise is necessary to ensure that any decision ultimately taken does not inadvertently occasion further degradation of the Aravalli ecosystem and that appropriate measures are devised to safeguard these ancient mountain ranges and the ecological systems that they sustain.”
