Aravalli Hills Row: SC Bars New Petitions, Seeks Expert Panel; Kapil Sibal Says Mountains Cannot Be Defined

New Delhi:  The Supreme Court’s ongoing hearing on the Aravalli Hills case has once again brought the spotlight on illegal mining, ecological safeguards, and the contentious issue of defining the fragile mountain range. Chief Justice Surya Kant, leading a three‑judge bench, made it clear that the court would not entertain fresh writ petitions in a matter it has already taken up on its own, warning that new filings risk distracting from the central questions. The bench stressed that illegal mining is a crime with potentially irreversible consequences, urging Rajasthan authorities to put enforcement machinery into action. Counsel for the state assured the court that no illegal mining would be permitted, with interim directions issued on December 29, 2025, continuing to operate.

Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal added a crucial dimension to the debate, arguing that mountains cannot be defined in rigid terms. Unlike the Himalayas, which rest on clear sub‑tectonic strata, the Aravallis are geologically complex and varied. He cautioned that attempting to impose a uniform definition could create fresh regulatory and ecological problems, potentially leaving large swathes of the range vulnerable. His submission came as the court reiterated that the questions of defining “forests” and “Aravallis” would be examined separately, recognising that each raises distinct concerns requiring independent consideration.

The bench also recorded the presence of Additional Solicitor General Bhati, Mr. Natraj for Rajasthan, Amicus Curiae K. Parameshwar, and the Member Secretary of the Central Empowered Committee. In a significant move, the court asked for names of eminent environmentalists, forest specialists, and mining experts to form a high‑powered committee. This expert body, working under the court’s supervision, will be tasked with reviewing earlier reports, clarifying definitions, and assessing ecological risks. Amicus Parameshwar has been given four weeks to file a detailed note on the definition of the Aravallis, which will form the basis of further deliberations.

The controversy over the Aravallis began after the Supreme Court’s November 20, 2025 order accepted a uniform definition of the hills, stating that only landforms rising 100 metres or more above the surrounding terrain would qualify. According to the Forest Survey of India, of 12,081 hills mapped across Delhi, Haryana, Rajasthan, and Gujarat, just 1,048 or 8.7 percent meet this criterion. The ruling triggered widespread alarm among environmentalists, locals, and civil society groups, who warned that vast stretches of ecologically vital land would lose protection, opening the door to mining and construction.

The apex court, while endorsing a scientific definition, simultaneously imposed a ban on fresh mining leases across the four states until expert reports are finalised. Republic TV’s continuous campaign against the November 2025 decision has played a crucial role in keeping the issue in the public eye, amplifying concerns that the new definition could weaken protections and highlighting the urgent need to safeguard the Aravalli range.

For now, the court’s message is unambiguous: enforcement must be tightened, ecological safeguards strengthened, and definitions reconsidered with care. The matter will be taken up again after the amicus submits his note, with the interim stay on the 100‑metre definition continuing until a final decision is reached. The Aravalli Hills, long a natural shield against desertification and a lifeline for groundwater recharge, remain at the centre of one of India’s most consequential environmental battles.

Read More: This Is Exclusive: Aravalli Illegal Mining Caught On Cam | Republic Investigation