Supreme Court To Form Expert Committee On Aravalli Hills And Ranges Issue; Extends Stay On Mining Activities

The Supreme Court has said that it will constitute a specialised committee of eminent environmentalists and scientists to re-examine the legal and ecological complexities surrounding the Aravalli hills and ranges.

The Court has asked the Ministry of Forestry and Environment to ascertain the following: A) define the expression of Aravallis, B) its total area, C) the radius and tree logs, etc., D) the forest cover, E) the part of the Aravallis already utilized.

The Bench of Chief Justice Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice Vipul M Pancholi ordered, "We do not propose to extend further time beyond that, as it will unnecessarily delay the proceedings. The opinion of the Ministry of Forestry and Environment shall be of eminent assistance for the purpose of A) defining the expression of Aravallis, B) its total area, C) the radius and tree logs, etc., D), the forest cover, E), the part of the Aravallis already utilized. We request the ministry to suggest a panel of domain experts along with their profile. Senior counsels are also requested to give profiles of some eminent domain experts for the purpose of constituting the committee, as was observed by this court. We are conscious of the fact that all activities...especially mining for which a license was granted has come to a halt. However, such a status quo will have to be maintained for the time being till some preliminary issues are answered in a phased manner. Post this matter on so and so date at 2 pm for the constitution of the committee..."

Senior Advocate K Parameshwar appeared as Amicus Curiae, while Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi appeared for an Applicant.

The Court remarked, "If you will, original, go by the original history, this Supreme Court building, this building is also in Aravalli, so many other buildings will also, if you go by the old history. But it starts from the Rashtrapati Bhavan, starts from that, that's the top, you will find so many… Entire Jaipur city, entire Jodhpur city, entire, may be, Kota, and all these things may be in the Aravalli. But today to say that it is Aravalli may not be, it will be a misnomer, those areas which have been developed for centuries."

Rohatgi submitted, "I have an IA. I have a mining lease. I have all permissions...I got the mining lease after 10 years of litigation. Rightly so. First they said I am not in Aravalli. Then they said you might be. I am taking a position that I might be.

Chief Justice Kant said, "I would be free for all to say I am not in Aravalli because unfortunately, nobody knows what is Aravalli...Eventually, the lawful mining we will permit...But first the entire exercise has to be completed. Identification of what is actually Aravalli. No problem...Let the subject experts tell us. First principle mining, permissible or not. Can mining be allowed at all? Yes. If they say it can be allowed. Up to what conditions? Then who will monitor those conditions? All these one by one. These stages will come. It will take time. But we will cross. We will cross all bridges. And we will reach the right destination."

The Court said, "Let the experts tell us whether mining can be allowed or not. If it is to be allowed, then to what extent it can be allowed."

Previously, the Court, on January 21, 2026, extended the stay on its November 20 verdict, ruling that the interim directions keeping the judgment in abeyance will remain in force. The Court called for the constitution of a specialized committee of eminent environmentalists and scientists to assist the Court in examining the present case. The Court directed parties to place a comprehensive note of the legal questions involved on record and scheduled the matter for further hearing in four weeks.

"Mr. Prameshwar has circulated a self-picking in detail note. Letsoft copy thereof be also circulated amongst the senior counsels for the parties as well as those who wish to assist this court as interveners. In this regard, we have also entrusted Mr. Cheema, Advocate, who is known as a Domain Expert, to provide his assistance to the court. The Counsel to the parties are granted further time to submit their respective notes in time by 10th of March 2026", the Court ordered.

Background

The Apex Court said there are issues that will require clarification. It issued a notice to the Centre and others in the suo motu matter and posted it for further hearing on January 21.

The Apex Court on November 20 accepted a uniform definition of the Aravalli hills and ranges and banned the grant of fresh mining leases inside its areas spanning Delhi, Haryana, Rajasthan and Gujarat until experts' reports are out.

The Apex Court had accepted the recommendations of a committee of the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change on the definition of the Aravalli hills and ranges to protect the world's oldest mountain system.

The committee had recommended that "Aravalli Hill" be defined as any landform in designated Aravalli districts with an elevation of 100 metres or more above its local relief, and an "Aravalli Range" will be a collection of two or more such hills within 500 metres of each other.

The Apex Court on November 20 delivered a 29-page judgment in the suo motu matter arising out of the long-running environmental litigation in the T N Godavarman Thirumulpad case.

"We further accept the recommendations with regard to the prohibition of mining in core/inviolate areas with exception as carved out of the ... committee's report," the Apex Court had said. It had also accepted the recommendations for sustainable mining and the steps to be taken for preventing illegal mining in the Aravali Hills and Ranges.

Former Chief Justice of India, Justice BR Gavai, had said in a television interview that the Aravalli Hills judgment, which was passed by a three-judge bench headed by him, was passed in a continuing mandamus case and that a subsequent bench can correct the Judgment, if there is any error in it.

Cause Title: In Re: Definition of Aravalli Hills and Ranges and Ancillary Issues [SMW(C) No. 10/2025]