Demonstrations have broken out 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 spanning the states of Rajasthan, Haryana, Gujarat, and Delhi.
Under the new definition, endorsed by the court following federal government suggestions, an Aravalli hill is any geographical feature rising at least 100 metres (328 ft) from the adjacent land. A cluster of such hills less than half a kilometre of each other, combined with the land between them, are deemed to be an Aravalli range.
Ecologists assert that classifying Aravalli hills by height could leave numerous shorter, vegetation-clad but ecologically critical hills unprotected from quarrying and development.
The federal government, however, maintains that the new definition is meant to strengthen regulation and establish consistency and not dilute safeguards.
Why are People Protesting?
Recently, calm demonstrations were held in cities such as Gurugram and Udaipur, organized 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 essential function of the Aravalli range in "halting desert expansion, replenishing aquifers and protecting livelihoods" in the northwestern region.
The shorter, vegetated hills play a vital role in preventing desertification, boosting water tables and supporting livelihoods as per experts.
"This mountain system should not be defined solely by elevation, but by its environmental, physical and weather-related purpose," noted an environmental activist associated with the movement to preserve the Aravallis.
He said that, internationally, mountains and hill systems are identified by the functions they perform, not by arbitrary elevation thresholds.
"Any landform that is geologically part of the Aravalli system and serves a vital purpose in ecology or combating desertification must be acknowledged as a component of the system, regardless of its height."
Protesters are calling for that the government define Aravalli areas using scientific criteria, including geography, ecology, wildlife connectivity and climate resilience.
A campaigner cautioned that the court's new definition might promote extractive industries, development and business projects, heightening the threat of environmental harm.
Opposition parties have stepped up criticism, cautioning that the new definition might lead to serious ecological damage.
A senior politician declared that safeguarding the Aravallis is "inseparable from Delhi's survival." Another leader described the range the state's "life-support system," stating that without it, "the entire area up to Delhi would have turned into a desert."
The Government's Stance
India's central government has sought to downplay these apprehensions.
In a official release, it asserted the new definition is meant to bolster governance and bring uniformity, noting that a clear, unambiguous definition was needed to oversee extraction consistently across states.
It added that the new definition encompasses the entire hill system – incorporating slopes, related features, and intervening areas – explicitly protecting hill clusters and their linkages.
The federal environment ministry said it is incorrect to presume that mining will be permitted on all landforms under 100 metres.
The government says areas within the Aravalli hills or ranges are excluded from new mining leases, while current operations can continue if they follow sustainable mining norms.
It added that mining remains banned in core "inviolate" areas – reserved woodlands, environmentally fragile zones, and wetlands – aside from certain essential, national security, and nuclear minerals permitted by law.
The minister responsible for ecology said only about 2% of the vast Aravalli range might be open to extraction, and only after comprehensive assessments and formal clearance.
However, several of the demonstrating organizations contend that protests will persist and that they are exploring legal options to challenge the court's new definition.
