Protests have erupted across the northern part of the country after the nation's top court issued a new definition for the Aravalli hills – among the planet's most ancient mountain ranges stretching across the states of Rajasthan, Haryana, Gujarat, and Delhi.
As per the revised criteria, approved by the court based on central government recommendations, an Aravalli hill is any landform rising at least 100 metres (328 ft) above the adjacent land. Two or more such hills within 500 metres of each other, combined with the land between them, are considered an Aravalli range.
Conservationists contend that defining Aravalli hills based on elevation risks leaving numerous lower, scrub-covered but ecologically critical hills unprotected from quarrying and development.
The central administration, however, states that the revised definition is meant to strengthen regulation and establish consistency and not dilute protections.
What is Sparking the Demonstrations?
Recently, calm demonstrations occurred in cities including Gurugram and Udaipur, led by community members, farmers, environmental activists, and, in some cases, lawyers and political groups.
An organizing member of a prominent environmental group stated that the new definition risks undermining the critical role of the Aravalli range in "preventing desertification, replenishing aquifers and protecting livelihoods" in northwest India.
The shorter, vegetated hills play a vital role in preventing desertification, recharging groundwater and sustaining communities according to experts.
"This mountain system must not be categorized by height alone, but by its ecological, geological and climatic role," noted an environmental activist involved in the movement to save the Aravallis.
He said that, globally, mountain ranges are classified by the roles they play, not by arbitrary elevation thresholds.
"Any feature that is structurally a component of the Aravalli system and plays a critical role in the ecosystem or combating desertification should be recognised as a component of the system, regardless of its height."
Activists are demanding that the government delineate Aravalli areas using scientific criteria, including geography, ecology, wildlife connectivity and environmental durability.
A campaigner cautioned that the court's new definition might promote extractive industries, development and business projects, increasing the risk of ecological damage.
Opposition parties have stepped up criticism, cautioning that the new definition could cause significant environmental degradation.
One political leader declared that protecting the Aravallis is "fundamentally linked to Delhi's survival." Another leader called the range the state's "lifeline," adding that without it, "a vast region up to Delhi would have become a desert."
What Does the Government Say?
India's federal government has attempted to minimize these concerns.
In a official release, it said the new definition is intended to strengthen regulation and create standardization, adding that a single, objective definition was needed to regulate mining uniformly across states.
It added that the new definition covers the entire hill system – incorporating slopes, related features, and intervening areas – explicitly protecting hill clusters and their connections.
The federal environment ministry clarified it is incorrect to assume that mining will be allowed on all landforms under 100 metres.
The government says areas within the Aravalli hills or ranges are not eligible for new mining leases, while current operations can continue if they adhere to environmentally sound practices.
It noted that mining remains prohibited in core "inviolate" areas – protected forests, eco-sensitive zones, and wetlands – aside from certain essential, national security, and nuclear minerals allowed by law.
The minister responsible for ecology indicated only about two percent of the vast Aravalli range might be open to extraction, and only after comprehensive assessments and formal clearance.
However, many of the protesting groups say that demonstrations will continue and that they are exploring legal options to contest the court's new definition.
