THE ARAVALLI JUDGEMENT

CONTEXT

The Aravalli Hills, among the world’s oldest mountain systems, extend from Delhi–Haryana–Rajasthan–Gujarat and perform critical ecological functions:

• • act as a barrier against Thar desertification,
  • serve as a major groundwater recharge zone,
  • function as biodiversity habitats and Delhi-NCR’s “green lungs.”

Despite repeated judicial interventions, uncontrolled and illegal mining, ambiguous definitions of “Aravalli Hills/Ranges,” and fragmented state policies led to:

• • ecological degradation,
  • judicial inconsistency,
  • regulatory arbitrage by mining interests.

To resolve this, the Supreme Court constituted a high-level committee (May 2024) under the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (MoEF&CC) to evolve a uniform, scientific, and enforceable definition of Aravalli Hills and Ranges, especially for regulating mining.

THE SC JUDGMENT (DATED 20.11.2025)

1. Accepted the Committee’s operational definitions of Aravalli Hills and Aravalli Ranges.

2. Imposed an interim moratorium on new mining leases in the Aravalli landscape until a Management Plan for Sustainable Mining (MPSM) is prepared.

3. Directed MoEF&CC to prepare the MPSM through ICFRE, treating the Aravallis as a continuous geological ridge from Gujarat to Delhi.

4. Permitted continuation of existing mines only under strict sustainable-mining safeguards and compliance monitoring.

5. Allowed narrow exceptions only for critical, strategic, and atomic minerals as notified under the MMDR Act, 1957, subject to stringent conditions.

Judicial emphasis: ecological integrity, landscape-level conservation, and precautionary principle over piecemeal economic gains.

KEY FACTS AT A GLANCE

Aspect	Key Facts / Details
Period of Judgment	Final directions issued in November 2025
Core Issue	Absence of a uniform, scientific definition of Aravalli Hills & Ranges leading to illegal/unregulated mining
Geographical Spread	Aravalli range extends across Delhi, Haryana, Rajasthan, Gujarat
Committee Constituted By	Supreme Court (Order dated 9 May 2024, further directions 12 Aug 2025)
Nodal Ministry	Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (MoEF&CC)
Committee Composition	Forest Secretaries of concerned States/UT, Forest Survey of India, Geological Survey of India, Central Empowered Committee
Ecological Importance Recognised	Barrier against desertification, groundwater recharge, biodiversity habitat, Delhi-NCR green lungs

 COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS (ACCEPTED BY THE COURT)

Term	Definition (Exam-Critical)
Aravalli Hills	Any landform rising ≥100 metres above local relief, including entire area within the lowest contour line, along with supporting slopes & associated landforms
Local Relief	Height measured from the lowest contour encircling the landform, not from mean sea level
Aravalli Range	Two or more Aravalli Hills located within 500 metres proximity, including intervening valleys, slopes, hillocks
Key Clarification	Mining is NOT automatically permitted below 100 m; entire hill system is protected

NOTE: This makes it wrong to assume that mining is permitted in all areas below 100 m; the entire hill system is protected.

Mapping & Objectivity

• • Mandatory marking of Aravalli Hills and Ranges on Survey of India toposheets.
  • Use of map-verifiable, contour-based criteria to prevent discretion and manipulation.

Protection of Core/Inviolate Areas

Absolute prohibition of mining in:

• • Protected Areas & Tiger Reserves
  • Eco-Sensitive Zones / default ESZs (as per T.N. Godavarman)
  • Wetlands (500 m buffer)
  • CAMPA and government-funded plantations
  • Wildlife corridors and conservation investments

Sustainable Mining Framework

• • Strong EIA/EMP with cumulative impact assessment.
  • Groundwater safeguards (CGWB/SGWB NOCs).
  • Mandatory post-mining restoration and rehabilitation.
  • Six-monthly compliance reports and joint inspections.

Prevention of Illegal Mining

• • Drones, CCTV, night-vision surveillance.
  • E-challans, weighbridges, trenches on access paths.
  • District-level task forces (Forest–Revenue–Police–Mining).
  • Immediate closure and penalties for violations.

Management Plan for Sustainable Mining (MPSM)

Feature	Details
Prepared By	Indian Council of Forestry Research and Education (ICFRE)
Approach	Landscape-level planning treating Aravallis as a continuous geological ridge
Key Components	Carrying capacity analysis, cumulative environmental impact, zonation (permitted / prohibited), restoration plans
Model Followed	Similar to Saranda Forest MPSM (Jharkhand)
Status	Mandatory prerequisite before granting any new mining lease

PROS (STRENGTHS OF THE JUDGMENT)

1. Ecological certainty: Removes ambiguity by adopting scientific, contour-based definitions.

2. Landscape-level protection: Treats Aravallis as a continuous ecological system, preventing fragmentation.

3. Rule of law strengthened: Closes loopholes that enabled illegal mining and post-facto regularisation.

4. Precautionary governance: Freeze on new leases prevents irreversible damage pending MPSM.

5. Balances development & security: Allows narrowly tailored mining for strategic/atomic minerals.

Mining Regulations & Restrictions

Category	Judgment Position
New Mining Leases	Complete freeze until Management Plan for Sustainable Mining (MPSM) is finalised
Existing Mines	Allowed to continue only with strict compliance to sustainable mining safeguards
Absolute Prohibition Zones	Protected Areas, Tiger Reserves, ESZs (including default ESZs), Wetlands, CAMPA plantations
Exception Allowed	Only for atomic minerals (Part B), critical & strategic minerals (Part D) and Schedule VII minerals under MMDR Act, 1957
Construction / Mining in Core Areas	Strictly prohibited

CONS / CONCERNS

1. Implementation capacity: States with weak monitoring may struggle with enforcement.

2. Economic impact: Short-term slowdown in mining-dependent local economies.

3. Inter-state coordination challenges: Uniform application across four States/UTs requires strong federal cooperation.

4. Risk of dilution: Pressure to expand “strategic minerals” exception could weaken safeguards.

5. Non-mining pressures remain: Urbanisation, construction, and infrastructure projects still threaten Aravallis beyond mining.

WAY FORWARD

1. Speedy Finalisation of MPSM

• • Complete ICFRE-led MPSM with:
    • carrying-capacity analysis,
    • climate resilience assessment,
    • district-wise zoning (prohibited / conditional / restoration areas).

2. Integrate Aravalli Protection into Urban Planning

• • Align Master Plans, RERA approvals, and infrastructure projects with Aravalli maps.
  • Prevent “mining ban but construction boom” paradox.

3. Strengthen Federal & Local Institutions

• • Permanent Aravalli Conservation Authority.
  • Dedicated funding for monitoring, restoration, and community livelihoods.

4. Community-Centric Conservation

• • Promote eco-restoration jobs, water harvesting, and green livelihoods.
  • Treat local communities as stakeholders, not obstacles.

5. Transparency & Public Access

• • Open-access Aravalli GIS portal.
  • Citizen reporting mechanisms against violations.

CONCLUSION

The Supreme Court’s 2025 Aravalli judgment marks a shift from fragmented regulation to landscape-level ecological governance. By grounding protection in science, mapping, and precaution, it reconciles constitutional environmentalism with responsible development.

If implemented in letter and spirit, the decision ensures that the Aravallis remain India’s ecological shield, not a casualty of short-term extraction—upholding both inter-generational justice and sustainable growth.

CASE-LAW LINKAGES FOR ARAVALLI PROTECTION

1. T.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad v. Union of India (1996–ongoing)

➤ Doctrine: Continuing Mandamus & Landscape-level Conservation

Core Principles Evolved

• • Expanded the meaning of “forest” beyond legal classification to ecological reality.
  • Introduced default Eco-Sensitive Zone (ESZ) protection where States delay notifications.
  • Established continuing mandamus, allowing the Court to monitor compliance over decades.
  • Emphasised precautionary principle and inter-generational equity.

Linkage with Aravalli Judgment (2025)

• • The Aravalli decision mirrors Godavarman’s landscape approach by treating the Aravallis as a continuous geological ridge, not fragmented parcels.
  • Default ESZ logic applies where formal notifications are pending—mining prohibited regardless of state delay.
  • The freeze on new mining leases until MPSM reflects continuing judicial oversight.
  • Reinforces that ecology, not revenue or land records, determines protection.

2. Lafarge Umiam Mining Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India (2011)

➤ Doctrine: Sustainable Development & Scientific Decision-Making

Core Principles Evolved

• • Development and environment are not antagonistic but complementary.
  • Decisions must be based on scientific studies, expert committees, and cumulative impact assessments.
  • Introduced the idea of “informed decision-making” in environmental clearances.
  • Emphasised balancing ecology, economy, and community interests.

Linkage with Aravalli Judgment (2025)

• • The Aravalli ruling operationalises Lafarge by:
    • Mandating ICFRE-led Management Plan for Sustainable Mining (MPSM).
    • Requiring carrying capacity and cumulative impact analysis.
    • Allowing mining only where scientifically justified, not politically expedient.
  • Narrow exception for critical/strategic minerals reflects Lafarge’s balancing test, not blanket prohibition.

3. M.C. Mehta v. Union of India (Oleum Gas Leak, Ganga, Taj Trapezium cases)

➤ Doctrine: Absolute Liability, Polluter Pays & Environmental Rule of Law

Core Principles Evolved

• • Absolute liability for hazardous activities—no exceptions.
  • Polluter Pays Principle: cost of environmental damage must be borne by the violator.
  • Environment is part of Article 21 (Right to Life).
  • Courts can impose preventive and remedial measures, not merely compensation.

Linkage with Aravalli Judgment (2025)

• • Strong enforcement against illegal mining through:
    • drones, surveillance, inspections, and penalties.
  • Emphasis on post-mining restoration and rehabilitation echoes polluter pays.
  • Recognises Aravallis as critical for air, water, and climate security, directly linking to Article 21.
  • Preventive freeze on new leases reflects “prevention is better than cure”, central to M.C. Mehta jurisprudence.

Case	Core Doctrine	Reflection in Aravalli Judgment
Godavarman	Landscape protection, ESZs, precaution	Continuous ridge protection, default safeguards
Lafarge	Sustainable mining, expert-led decisions	ICFRE-MPSM, carrying capacity analysis
M.C. Mehta	Polluter pays, Article 21	Restoration, strict enforcement, prevention

Environmental & Constitutional Principles

Principle	How Reflected in Judgment
Precautionary Principle	Moratorium on new mining until scientific planning
Public Trust Doctrine	State as trustee of Aravalli ecology
Inter-generational Equity	Protection for future water & climate security
Sustainable Development	Limited, regulated mining instead of blanket ban
Article 21 (Right to Life)	Environment linked to life, health, water, dignity

The Aravalli Hills remain under robust protection through the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change and coordinated efforts with state governments. The Government reiterates its commitment to ecological preservation, sustainable development, and transparency.

Contrary to alarmist claims, there is no imminent threat to the Aravallis’ ecology. Ongoing afforestation, eco-sensitive zone notifications, and strict monitoring of mining and urban activities ensure that the Aravallis continue to serve as a natural heritage and ecological shield for the nation. India’s resolve is clear: the Aravallis will be safeguarded for present and future generations while balancing conservation with responsible development.

REGULATION OF MINING

Protection of Core/inviolate Areas

Absolute Prohibition Zones:

1. New leases (general minerals): No new mining leases in areas mapped as Aravalli Hills and Ranges under the prescribed procedure. 2. Critical, strategic, and atomic minerals: A narrowly tailored exception applies to atomic minerals (First Schedule Part B), critical and strategic minerals (First Schedule Part D), and minerals in Schedule VII of the MMDR Act, given national security and economic imperatives; all other safeguards continue to apply. 3. Existing/renewal leases: An expert team (Forest, Mining & Geology, Local Administration, SPCB, and domain experts) must inspect to verify compliance with EC/CTO conditions, prescribe additional safeguards, and ensure ongoing monitoring by SPCB.

1. Protected areas: Including tiger reserves and identified corridors. 2. Eco-Sensitive Zones/Areas: Draft or final ESZ/ESA under EPA, 1986; where ESZ proposals are pending, apply Supreme Court’s default ESZ directions in T.N. Godavarman. 3. Buffer Zone: No mining within 1.0 km of Protected Area boundary even if notified ESZ is smaller. 4. Conservation investments: Areas with plantations raised via CAMPA, government funds, or international cooperation. 5. Wetlands: 500 m from Ramsar/wetlands under the 2017 Rules.

Sustainable Mining Safeguards

Preventing Illegal Mining: Operational Controls

1. Forest land approvals: Forest clearance (Van Adhiniyam, 1980) in addition to EC; compensatory afforestation, Net Present Value, wildlife plans, safety-zone greenbelts, and soil-moisture conservation are mandatory. 2. Environmental appraisal and EC: EAC/SEAC appraisal with ToR and standard EC conditions plus site-specific conditions; robust EIA/EMP addressing cumulative impacts as per the provisions of EIA Notification 2006, as amended. 3. Compliance monitoring: Six-monthly reports; first-year joint inspections by MoEF&CC RO, SPCB, SEAC, DMG, Forest, and CGWB/SGWB; EC may be held in abeyance upon non-compliance. 4. Audits and enforcement: Periodic checks by MoEF&CC RO and SPCBs, online monitoring, environmental auditors; repeated breaches can trigger EC/CTO revocation and penalties. 5. Groundwater safeguards: NOCs for DARK zones or when operations meet groundwater; protect hydrogeology and recharge functions. 6. Cultural heritage: NOC from ASI when near protected monuments (e.g., forts).

1. Regulated mining only: Permit with stringent conditions in designated areas; inviolate areas remain untouched. 2. Surveillance: Drones, CCTV (including night-vision), high-tech weighbridges, trenches on access paths, and special anti-illegal mining patrols. 3. Governance: District-level task forces (Revenue, Forest, Police, Mining), control rooms with toll-free complaint lines, and signage declaring prohibitions and penalties. 4. Logistics oversight: E-challan matching for dispatches; SPCB-led teams for monitoring transport and storage; immediate closure of any illegal mines.

Spread the Word