The Supreme Court on Monday stayed its November 20 judgment limiting the definition of the Aravalli Hills to landforms rising at least 100 meters above the surrounding terrain, holding that the issue was in “dire need of further investigation and clarification” to prevent regulatory gaps that could undermine the ecological integrity of one of India’s most fragile and important mountain systems.
Taking suo motu cognizance of the case, a bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justices JK Maheshwari and AG Masih ordered that the earlier judgment and the recommendations of the court-appointed committee be “stayed in abeyance” until a comprehensive re-examination is conducted with the assistance of a high-powered panel of independent domain experts.
The interim stay is likely to put a halt to the mapping and delineation process initiated earlier this month by the Union environment ministry and state governments to identify Aravalli areas, which will be carried out strictly on the basis of the now stalled 100 meter height criteria – an exercise that was aimed at laying the foundation for future mining decisions in the region.
“We consider it necessary to direct that the recommendations submitted by the committee, as well as the findings and directions laid down by this court in its judgment dated November 20, 2025, be kept in abeyance,” the bench said while posting notice to the Center and the four Aravalli states of Haryana, Delhi, Rajasthan and Gujarat for further hearing on January 21.
Describing the Aravalli as the “green lungs of north-western India”, the court underlined that the two-billion-year-old range serves as an indispensable ecological and socio-economic backbone of the region, acting as a natural barrier separating the Thar Desert from the fertile northern plains, while maintaining diverse ecosystems and livelihoods.
The decision came after weeks of outrage over concerns that the definition could expose ancient ranges to commercial exploitation and mining. Union Environment Minister Bhupendra Yadav reiterated that his ministry is committed to “protection and restoration of the Aravalli ranges”.
“As things stand, there is a complete ban on mining in respect of new mining leases or renewal of old mining leases,” he said on X.
The top court bench said that despite its historical and environmental importance, the Aravalis had faced uncontrolled urbanization, deforestation and intensive resource exploitation for decades, describing it as an “inherently fragile ecosystem”.
It noted that the November 20 decision sparked a flood of contentious applications, diverse petitions, and public criticism, particularly from environmentalists, raising concerns about the ambiguity, misinterpretation, and improper implementation of the new definition.
Stating that there was no scientific material on record to justify full acceptance of these criticisms, the court said that prima facie it appeared that both the committee report and the November decision failed to clearly clarify several “important issues”.
Pointing to the widespread apprehension, the bench said, “There is a strong need for further investigation and clarification to prevent any regulatory gaps undermining the ecological integrity of the Aravalli region.”
Among the unresolved questions raised by the court were whether restricting the Aravalis to a 500-metre proximity between eligible hills creates a structural contradiction by reducing the conservation footprint; Does this approach perversely expand the so-called “non-Aravalli” areas where unregulated mining can continue; And how will ecological continuity be preserved where the interval between eligible hills exceeds the prescribed distance.
The bench also took note of the criticism that only 1,048 of Rajasthan’s 12,081 hills meet the 100-metre limit – a claim which, if scientifically accurate, could take away a large part of the environmental protection limit. The court said this raised the possibility of a serious regulatory shortcoming, which required detailed scientific and geological assessment of the entire chain.
Given these concerns, the Court stated that it was willing to set up a High-Powered Expert Committee to conduct a holistic and multi-temporal assessment of the Committee’s report, including identifying which areas fall within and outside the proposed definition, evaluating the ecological impact of regulated mining, and examining whether excluding certain areas risks long-term erosion of the boundary.
During Monday’s hearing, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the Central government, welcomed the suo motu proceedings and said there were “numerous misunderstandings” regarding the November judgement. He said the earlier decision had accepted the report of the court-appointed expert committee and envisaged a detailed mining plan to be prepared by experts, which would become operational only after the approval of the Supreme Court. Mehta said the government has also decided to conduct public consultation before finalizing any mining plan.
However, the bench flagged a series of structural and ecological concerns arising from the height-based definition. These include whether restricting the Aravallis to landforms rising to 100 meters or more in height effectively limits the conservation area; whether it expands the scope of non-Aravalli lands where regulated mining can be permitted; And how mining will be carried out in the “gap” between two eligible mountain formations.
The bench also raised concerns over how the ecological continuity of the ancient mountain range will be preserved and whether a fresh and comprehensive assessment would be required if a significant regulatory vacuum is discovered that could compromise the structural integrity of the Aravalis.
Attorney General R Venkataramani, SG Mehta, senior counsel K Parameshwara (amicus curiae), and the Central Empowered Committee will assist the court.
The bench directed that the findings of the committee’s recommendations and the November 20 judgment be stayed until the proceedings reach a “logical finale” to ensure that no irreversible administrative or ecological action is taken.
The court further reiterated that, as a matter of “extreme caution”, no permissions, whether for new mining leases or for renewal of existing ones, will be granted in the Aravalli hills and ranges identified in the 2010 report of the Forest Survey of India, without the prior approval of the Supreme Court.
Suo motu proceedings were initiated on December 27 amid growing criticism of the November 20 decision, which had accepted the recommendation of an expert committee to define the Aravalis solely on height-based criteria. Under that definition, only landforms rising at least 100 meters above local relief, measured from the lowest outline encircling the landform to its summit, qualify as the Aravalli Hills.
Earlier there was no uniform definition of Aravali. Of the four states through which the mountains pass – Gujarat, Haryana, Rajasthan and Delhi, only Rajasthan had a definition for mountains – terrain with a slope of more than 3 degrees.
Environmental experts and conservationists warn that this approach excludes large parts of the small hills, peaks and undulating terrain that are part of the continuous geological and ecological system of the Aravalli Range, potentially opening them up to mining and development.
The controversy intensified after the Union Environment Ministry called a meeting on 8 December to begin ground work to delineate the Aravalli areas “as per the definition accepted by the Supreme Court on 20 November”, with state governments and the Survey of India tasked with mapping eligible landforms. The objective of that exercise was to serve as a baseline for preparation of Management Plan for Sustainable Mining (MPSM) through the Indian Council of Forestry Research and Education (ICFRE).
With the November judgment now on hold, the delimitation process is expected to be halted until the Supreme Court settles the definition question.
The Aravalli mountain range is one of the oldest fold mountains in the world, extending 700 kilometers from eastern Gujarat through Rajasthan and Haryana to Delhi, and plays an important ecological role. It acts as a natural barrier against desertification, aids groundwater recharge, and supports a diverse ecosystem of flora and fauna in otherwise arid landscapes.
