Copyright infringement not intended
Picture Courtesy: The Indian Express
The Supreme Court’s acceptance (November 2025) of the Environment Ministry’s recommendation to define Aravalli Hills as landforms 100 m or more above local relief has triggered concerns about ecological vulnerability.
|
Background of the Story Since 2010, the Forest Survey of India had been identifying Aravalli hills using a 3-degree slope benchmark, but in 2024 a technical sub-committee revised this approach and recommended that landforms with a minimum slope of 4.57 degrees and a height of at least 30 metres should be recognised as part of the Aravalli system, a criterion that would have brought nearly 40% of the terrain under protection. In contrast, the government later introduced a far narrower definition that counted only those landforms rising 100 metres or more above the immediate ground level as Aravalli, and internal FSI mapping in 2025 revealed that out of 12,081 hills that are at least 20 metres high, only 1,048—or just 8.7%—meet this threshold. The Supreme Court ultimately accepted this new 100-metre elevation definition on the grounds of ensuring uniformity and facilitating sustainable mining across the region.
Picture Courtesy: The Indian Express |
Air pollution barrier for NCR: The lower Aravalli hills, many of which rise only 10–30 metres, act as the first natural wall against coarse dust and sand transported from the Thar Desert, and FSI–IITM observations show that when these lower ridges are breached or removed, dust loads in Delhi–NCR can spike by 4–6 times, as witnessed during the severe dust episode of May 2022 in Gurugram and Delhi.
Biodiversity corridors and wildlife movement: The lower Aravallis also function as essential wildlife passages connecting major habitats such as Sariska–Ranthambhore and the Kumbhalgarh–Todgarh belt, and long-term camera-trap evidence (2018–2023) from the Alwar–Karauli landscape shows that leopards, hyenas and dispersing tigers consistently use these broken ridgelines for movement. Fragmentation of these corridors has already led to rising human–wildlife conflict incidents around the Delhi–Gurugram border
Hydrological recharge and water security: These lower hills play a major role in groundwater recharge across water-stressed regions, with southern Haryana now having 26 out of 28 blocks in the “overexploited” category, and Central Ground Water Board assessments (2021–24) indicate that mining-induced slope removal in the Aravallis increases surface runoff while drastically reducing infiltration.
Climate adaptation and desertification control: The Aravallis also help regulate local microclimates by moderating surface temperatures in arid landscapes, and satellite imagery from the last two decades shows that intact hill ridges slow the eastward expansion of the Thar Desert.
Misinterpretation of Slope and Elevation: The Ministry’s methodology has been questioned because it averaged slopes across entire districts—many dominated by plains—thereby lowering overall slope values and creating the false impression that established Aravalli districts do not meet earlier scientific benchmarks
Exclusion of Recognised Aravalli Districts: The new definition omitted well-established Aravalli districts such as Chittorgarh, home to a UNESCO-listed fort built atop a prominent Aravalli outcrop, and Sawai Madhopur, which hosts Ranthambhore at the Aravalli–Vindhya junction, despite decades of geomorphological surveys confirming their inclusion in the range, raising concerns about selective representation.
Sidelining of scientific inputs: Key scientific work—including FSI’s district-wise technical mapping and its September 2025 report, which demonstrated that even 10–30 metre ridges function as effective sand and dust barriers—was not formally acknowledged in the affidavit submitted to the Supreme Court, mirroring earlier governance patterns such as the dilution of the Western Ghats (Gadgil Committee) recommendations and questioning the credibility of evidence-based decision-making in environmental matters.
Risk of regulatory flexibilization: The restrictive 100-metre definition increases the area open to mining and construction, indirectly benefiting mining interests in Rajasthan where the Aravallis have already experienced decades of legal and illegal extraction, and this shift risks undermining the Supreme Court’s original intent of curbing illegal mining, thereby moving policy away from precautionary conservation toward a more permissive regulatory regime.
|
Ethical issue in Governance Transparency and openness in decision-making: The process raises concerns about ethical transparency because key scientific reports—such as FSI’s district-wise mapping and its September 2025 findings—were not formally placed before the Supreme Court, limiting the visibility of crucial evidence that should have informed the final definition. Integrity and use of scientific evidence: Ethical public administration demands the primacy of scientific expertise, yet the sidelining of FSI’s technical assessments echoes earlier cases like the dilution of the Gadgil Committee recommendations. Ignoring empirical evidence violates the ethical principles of objectivity, competence, and professional responsibility, and undermines trust in regulatory institutions. Justice and Intergenerational equity: By reducing protection to only 8.7% of Aravalli landforms, the new definition risks exacerbating air pollution, groundwater depletion, and ecological fragmentation, thereby harming communities—especially vulnerable groups—and compromising the environmental rights of future generations. This violates the ethical commitment to intergenerational justice and the constitutional expectation of sustainable development under Article 48A. |
Geological Survey of India (GSI) Inputs (2024)
Survey of India (SOI) Inputs (2024)
Central Empowered Committee (CEC) Observations
While not issuing a specific definition, CEC (appointed by SC) made consistent recommendations across multiple mining-related cases:
Supreme Court Directives (2002–2025)
The SC in many mining cases (e.g., M.C. Mehta v. Union of India, Aravalli Mining Ban 2002–2004) has:
National Capital Region Planning Board (NCRPB)
The Supreme Court’s acceptance of a 100-m elevation-based definition of the Aravalli Hills significantly shrinks the legally protected landscape—effectively excluding over 90% of low and mid-elevation hills that act as crucial ecological buffers for NCR. Despite FSI’s warnings that even 10–30 m hills function as strong windbreaks and wildlife corridors, the government’s narrow definition risks accelerating mining, weakening natural dust barriers, and aggravating NCR’s already severe air pollution and ecological fragility.
|
Must Read: Aravali Hills | Aravali Range | Ecological degradation in Aravallis alarming: CAG | ARAVALLI GREEN WALL PROJECT | |
Source: Indian Express
|
Practice Question Q. The recent redefinition of the Aravalli Hills by the Government of India has raised serious environmental concerns. Critically analyse. (250 words) |
Because over 90% of Aravalli hills are below 100 m, yet they play a crucial role as natural wind and sand barriers, wildlife corridors, and aquifer recharge zones. The new definition excludes these and opens them to mining.
FSI recommended a 30-m height + 4.57° slope criterion (about 40% Aravallis), highlighting that even 10–30 m hills block sand and dust from the Thar desert. But this scientific input was not reflected in the final definition.
Yes. Even 10–30 m ridges act as natural windbreaks that block coarse sand from the Thar Desert. FSI’s 2025 report and IITM dust-transport modelling show that weakening this barrier sharply increases dust load, contributing to severe pollution episodes in Delhi–NCR.
© 2025 iasgyan. All right reserved
