4 min readNew DelhiUpdated: Jul 22, 2026 03:31 AM IST
The High-Powered Committee constituted by the Supreme Court to examine issues surrounding the Aravalli Hills and Ranges Tuesday officially sought representations, suggestions, and inputs from a broad spectrum of stakeholders, including the states across which the range spans.
According to a government press release, the panel has invited comments from environmentalists, conservationists, non-profit organisations, mining leaseholders, project proponents, villagers, farmers, mine workers, and local communities whose livelihoods and well-being are intrinsically tied to the region’s biodiversity.
Submissions, supported “to the extent possible” by documentary evidence or verifiable material, must be submitted via email or an official Google Form within 21 days of the notice.
At over a billion years old, the Aravallis are one of the oldest mountain ranges in the world, formed during the Precambrian Era due to the collision of tectonic plates of the earth’s crust. The 700-odd-km range stretches across four states (Gujarat, Rajasthan, Haryana and Delhi) and 37 districts, with 560 km lying in Rajasthan.
Resolving the 100-metre definition row
The Supreme Court established the panel in June under the leadership of Kanchan Devi, Director General of the Indian Council of Forestry Research and Education (ICFRE), to obtain a “fair, impartial, and independent” assessment. The committee’s mandate is to resolve critical ambiguities in an October 2025 report submitted by an Environment Secretary-led panel. The panel is scheduled to submit its comprehensive report to the court by August 31.
Previously, a Supreme Court bench comprising Chief Justice Surya Kant, Justice J K Maheshwari, and Justice Augustine George Masih stayed the top court’s own earlier order accepting a proposed definition of the Aravalli Hills. That definition had categorised the Aravallis as any landform within the region with an elevation of 100 metres or more above the local relief, including its slopes and adjacent land.
The initial acceptance of the 100-metre elevation benchmark sparked widespread public debate after a series of reports by The Indian Express revealed that the criteria would leave over 90 per cent of the vulnerable hill range outside protection, potentially opening vast tracts to unchecked mining and construction.
Story continues below this ad
“There has been a significant outcry among environmentalists, who have expressed profound concern about the potential for misinterpretation and proper implementation of the newly adopted definition and this Court’s directions. This public dissent and criticism appear to stem from the perceived ambiguity and lack of clarity in certain terms and directives issued by this court,” the Supreme Court noted in its December 29 order, staying the implementation of the ministry report and court’s November 20 judgment.
Committee composition and scope
The panel’s other members are Subhas Ashutosh, former Director General, Forest Survey of India; Rajendra Kumar Sharma, Director (retired), Geological Survey of India; Brij Mohan Singh Rathore, former joint secretary, Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (MoEFCC); and Professor Ashok K Bhatnagar, former professor and head of Botany, Delhi University.
Further, special invitees who will be associated by the chairperson from time to time include Professor Jagdish Krishnaswamy, Dean, School of Environment and Sustainability, Indian Institute of Human Settlements, and Professor (Dr) Laxmikant Sharma, Central University of Rajasthan. In addition, an officer of the rank of Director in the MoEFCC has to be nominated by the Centre as a member secretary.
The committee has been tasked with looking into a definitive enumeration of specific regions that fall within the scope of the 100-metre definition recommended by the ministry panel. It also has to analyse whether ‘sustainable mining’ or ‘regulated mining’ within the newly demarcated Aravalli areas, notwithstanding regulatory oversight, would result in adverse ecological consequences.
