CivilsWisdom.
Updated · Today
Environment & Ecology May 25, 2026 6 min read Daily brief · #14 of 24

Supreme Court considers bigger public participation in defining Aravalli

The Supreme Court is considering expanding public participation in the process of defining the Aravalli Hills and Ranges, directing that the expert committee...

GS Paper 3 (Environment) GS Paper 2 (Polity)

What Happened

  • The Supreme Court is considering expanding public participation in the process of defining the Aravalli Hills and Ranges, directing that the expert committee to be constituted must consult domain experts and stakeholders so that broader public interest is heard.
  • The Court noted that the expert committee should be lean and functional — 5 to 7 members — but should collaborate extensively with domain experts and conduct wide stakeholder consultations before finalising its recommendations.
  • The Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (MoEFCC) expressed no objection to the Central Empowered Committee's (CEC's) proposal for a 10-member high-powered expert committee, to be chaired by the Director General of the Indian Council of Forestry Research and Education (ICFRE), Kanchan Devi.
  • This follows the Supreme Court's December 29, 2025 order staying its own November 20, 2025 judgment, which had adopted a uniform scientific definition of Aravalli Hills as "any landform with an elevation of 100 metres or more from the local relief."
  • The November 2025 definition was contested because an internal Forest Survey of India (FSI) assessment found the 100-metre threshold would exclude over 90% of the Aravalli system, and a spatial analysis by the Ashoka Trust for Research in Ecology and the Environment (ATREE) found more than 70% of Rajasthan's current Aravalli extent could be delisted — an area comparable in size to Arunachal Pradesh.
  • The Supreme Court has extended its stay on new mining activities in the Aravalli region pending the expert committee's report.
  • The Court directed that prior to implementing any committee report, a fair, impartial, and independent expert opinion must be obtained after associating all requisite stakeholders.

Static Topic Bridges

The Aravalli range is one of the world's oldest fold mountain systems, spanning approximately 692 kilometres across Gujarat, Rajasthan, Haryana, and the National Capital Territory of Delhi. It serves as a critical ecological spine for northern India — acting as a natural barrier against desert encroachment from the Thar, recharging groundwater aquifers, and providing green cover to rapidly urbanising Gurugram, Faridabad, and Delhi-NCR. The range has been subject to decades of illegal mining and encroachment, triggering a series of Supreme Court interventions beginning in the 1990s.

  • Total length: approximately 692 km, from Gujarat through Rajasthan, Haryana to Delhi
  • States covered: Gujarat, Rajasthan, Haryana, Delhi NCT
  • Forest Conservation Act, 1980: prohibits diversion of forest land for non-forest purposes without central government approval — the key law applied to Aravalli forests
  • Supreme Court 1992 order (T.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad v. Union of India, Writ Petition (Civil) No. 202 of 1995): established the principle that all forest land — whether notified or deemed — is subject to Forest Conservation Act protections; directly relevant to Aravalli governance
  • "Deemed forests" doctrine: forests identified in state-level records (not necessarily notified under the Indian Forest Act, 1927) also attract Forest Conservation Act protections after the Supreme Court's 1996 interpretation

Connection to this news: The core dispute is whether the new uniform definition of Aravalli Hills would reclassify vast tracts of currently protected Aravalli area as non-forest, thereby stripping Forest Conservation Act protections and enabling mining and real estate development.

The Forest Conservation Act, 1980 and Supreme Court's Custodial Role

The Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 (FCA) is the central legislation regulating diversion of forest land to non-forest use. Section 2 mandates prior approval of the central government before any state government or other authority permits use of forest land for non-forest purposes. The Supreme Court, in a series of orders from 1996 onwards, broadened the FCA's ambit to cover not just notified forests but any land recorded as forest in government records.

  • FCA, 1980, Section 2: no state government shall permit diversion of forest land without central government prior approval
  • Van (Sanrakshan Evam Samvardhan) Act, 2023: renamed the FCA and introduced significant amendments, including definition of "forest land" to limit some Supreme Court expansions — a contentious change
  • Compensatory Afforestation: mandatory under FCA; governed by the Compensatory Afforestation Fund Act, 2016
  • Central Empowered Committee (CEC): a Supreme Court-appointed body monitoring forest and environmental compliance; it proposed the 10-member Aravalli committee

Connection to this news: The definition of "Aravalli Hills" directly determines which lands attract Forest Conservation Act protection. A narrow definition (100-metre elevation threshold) would remove millions of hectares from FCA ambit, enabling construction and mining without central approval.

Public Participation in Environmental Decision-Making: Constitutional and Statutory Basis

The principle of public participation in environmental governance has both constitutional and statutory roots in India. Article 48A (Directive Principle) obligates the state to protect and improve the environment. Article 51A(g) (Fundamental Duty) requires citizens to protect the natural environment. The Environment Impact Assessment (EIA) Notification, 2006 mandates public hearings for Category A and B1 projects. The principle of public trust doctrine — articulated in M.C. Mehta v. Kamal Nath (1997) — holds that natural resources are held in trust by the state for the public and cannot be alienated for private use.

  • Article 48A: Directive Principle — state shall protect and improve the environment
  • Article 51A(g): Fundamental Duty — protect environment including forests, lakes, rivers, and wildlife
  • Public trust doctrine: M.C. Mehta v. Kamal Nath (1997) — Supreme Court applied it to hold that natural resources cannot be transferred for private commercial use against public interest
  • EIA Notification, 2006: requires public consultation for major projects affecting environment
  • National Green Tribunal Act, 2010: established NGT for expeditious disposal of environmental cases; NGT has concurrent jurisdiction in many Aravalli-related disputes

Connection to this news: The Supreme Court's insistence on broad stakeholder consultation before the expert committee finalises the Aravalli definition reflects the constitutional imperative of public participation — ensuring that communities dependent on the Aravalli ecosystem (farmers, forest dwellers, urban residents) have a say in decisions affecting their livelihoods and ecological security.

Judicial Oversight of Environmental Bodies: The CEC and Expert Committees

The Supreme Court has historically exercised supervisory jurisdiction over environmental protection through court-appointed bodies. The Central Empowered Committee (CEC) was constituted by the Supreme Court in 2002 in I.A. No. 1794 in Writ Petition (C) No. 202/1995 (T.N. Godavarman case) to address forest governance issues, recommend policy measures, and investigate violations. Expert committees appointed by courts are a well-established tool to bring scientific and technical expertise into judicial fact-finding.

  • CEC formed: 2002, by Supreme Court order in the Godavarman case
  • CEC functions: investigate forest diversion cases, recommend compensatory afforestation, advise on forest policy
  • ICFRE (Indian Council of Forestry Research and Education): apex research institution under MoEFCC for forestry science; proposed chair of the new Aravalli committee
  • ATREE (Ashoka Trust for Research in Ecology and the Environment): independent research institution whose spatial analysis challenged the 100-metre threshold

Connection to this news: The Supreme Court directing the constitution of a new high-powered committee — rather than simply implementing the November 2025 judgment — reflects the Court's recognition that a definition with potentially irreversible ecological consequences requires rigorous, multi-stakeholder scientific validation before judicial endorsement.

Key Facts & Data

  • Aravalli range: approximately 692 km, across Gujarat, Rajasthan, Haryana, and Delhi
  • Supreme Court November 20, 2025 judgment: defined Aravalli Hills as landforms with elevation ≥100 metres above local relief
  • Supreme Court December 29, 2025 order: stayed the November 2025 judgment; ordered formation of new expert committee
  • FSI assessment: 100-metre threshold would exclude over 90% of the Aravalli system from protection
  • ATREE analysis: over 70% of Rajasthan's Aravalli extent (83,380.9 sq km, covering 18,092 villages) could be delisted
  • Proposed committee size: 5–7 functional members, chaired by ICFRE DG
  • Mining stay: extended by Supreme Court pending committee report
  • Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980: key statutory protection for Aravalli forests
On this page
  1. What Happened
  2. Static Topic Bridges
  3. The Aravalli Range: Geography, Ecology, and Legal History
  4. The Forest Conservation Act, 1980 and Supreme Court's Custodial Role
  5. Public Participation in Environmental Decision-Making: Constitutional and Statutory Basis
  6. Judicial Oversight of Environmental Bodies: The CEC and Expert Committees
  7. Key Facts & Data
Display