Aravalli Hills #supreme #Court

🔴 Supreme Court Keeps Aravalli Hills Verdict in Abeyance; To Constitute New High-Level Expert Committee

Court: Supreme Court of India
Matter: In Re: Definition of Aravalli Hills and Ranges and Ancillary Issues
Case No.: Suo Motu Writ Petition (Civil) No. 10 of 2025
Order Date: 29 December 2025
Bench: Chief Justice of India; Justice J.K. Maheshwari; Justice Augustine George Masih (Vacation Bench)
Source: Supreme Court (Record of Proceedings)

The Supreme Court has kept its earlier decision on the Aravalli Hills and ranges in abeyance and announced that it will constitute a fresh, high-level independent expert committee to undertake a comprehensive scientific and ecological evaluation of the Aravalli region.

⚖️ Background

The Aravalli mountain range, often described as the “green lungs” of north-western India, has faced sustained environmental stress due to mining, urbanisation and deforestation. Owing to inconsistencies across States in defining the Aravalli Hills, the Supreme Court had earlier constituted an expert committee whose recommendations were accepted in its judgment dated 20.11.2025, including parameters such as 100-metre elevation and 500-metre proximity, along with restrictions on mining.

⚖️ Supreme Court’s Concerns

While revisiting the matter, the Court observed that:

Certain critical aspects require further clarity and scientific scrutiny;

The adopted criteria may unintentionally narrow the scope of protected Aravalli areas;

The 500-metre buffer could disrupt ecological continuity;

Concerns were raised that in some States, particularly Rajasthan, only limited hill formations would qualify as Aravallis, potentially leaving lower hillocks unprotected.


In view of these issues, the Court considered it prudent to pause the implementation of the earlier directions.

⚖️ New Expert Committee

The proposed high-level expert committee will:

Conduct a holistic, scientific and geological assessment of the Aravalli Hills and ranges;

Clearly identify areas to be included or excluded within the Aravalli definition;

Assess the short- and long-term environmental impact of mining and development;

Address regulatory gaps and provide clear, implementable recommendations.


⚖️ Interim Directions

The Supreme Court has:

Kept the judgment dated 20.11.2025 and earlier committee recommendations in abeyance;

Directed that no fresh or renewed mining leases shall be granted;

Continued the prohibition on mining in areas identified as Aravalli Hills/Ranges in the FSI Report dated 25.08.2010, without prior permission of the Court;

Issued notice to the Union of India and the States of Delhi, Rajasthan, Haryana and Gujarat;

Directed listing of the matter before the Green Bench on 21.01.2026;

Sought assistance of the Attorney General, Solicitor General, Amicus Curiae and the Central Empowered Committee (CEC).


⚖️ Legal & Environmental Significance

The order reflects the Court’s commitment to:

Prevent irreversible ecological damage pending scientific clarity;

Ensure that environmental protection is not diluted due to definitional ambiguities;

Apply the precautionary principle in environmental governance.


Conclusion:
By keeping its earlier verdict in abeyance and opting for a fresh expert-driven evaluation, the Supreme Court has adopted a cautious, science-based and inclusive approach towards the long-term protection of the Aravalli ecosystem, while ensuring that no irreversible harm occurs in the interim.


---

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

GOVT JOB OR PRIVATE JOB

Image
Lokayukta raid in Karnataka , where a former clerk, Kalakappa Nidagundi, from the Karnataka Rural Infrastructure Development Limited (KRIDL) was found to possess assets significantly disproportionate to his known income.  Here's a summary of the findings: Disproportionate Assets: Despite a modest monthly salary of ₹15,000, Nidagundi, a former daily-wage clerk in Koppal, was found to own assets worth over ₹30 crore during a Lokayukta raid. Seized Properties: The raid unearthed a vast amount of property including 24 residential houses, four plots, and 40 acres of agricultural land, registered in his name and those of his wife and brother. Other Valuables: Officials also seized 350 grams of gold, 1.5 kilograms of silver ornaments, and four vehicles (two cars and two two-wheelers) from his residence. Allegations of Fraud: Nidagundi, along with a former KRIDL engineer ZM Chincholkar, is accused of orchestrating a ₹72 crore scam by creating fake documents and bills for 96 incomplete infr...
Read more

That Res-judicata is a mixed question of law & fact and hence it cannot be decided as a preliminary issue under order XIV Rule 2 (2) of CPC.

Image
 *Headnotes*  - Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 ; Order XIV Rule 2 - The plea of res judicata in appropriate cases may be determined as preliminary issue when it is neither a disputed question of fact nor a mixed question of law and fact - Preliminary issues can be those where no evidence is required and on the basis of reading of the plaint or the applicable law, if the jurisdiction of the Court or the bar to the suit is made out, the Court may decide such issues with the sole objective for the expeditious decision. [Referred to Ramesh B. Desai and Ors. v. Bipin Vadilal Mehta and Ors (2006) 5 SCC 638 ] (Para 20, 30) - Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 ; Order XIV Rule 2 , Order XX Rule 5, Order XLI Rules 24 & 25- To avoid the possibility of remanding back the matter after the decision on the preliminary issues, it is mandated for the trial court under Order XIV Rule 2 and Order XX Rule 5, and for the first appellate court in terms of Order XLI Rules 24 and 25 to rec...
Read more

How to become advocate on record complete procedure

Image
How to become advocate on the record complete procedure To become an **Advocate on Record (AOR) at the Supreme Court of India**, one must meet specific qualifications, undergo mandatory training, pass the AOR Examination, and fulfill a set of procedural requirements[1][2][3]. ## Eligibility Criteria - **Enrolment as Advocate:** Must be enrolled with any State Bar Council and be a practicing advocate[1][4][2]. - **Experience:** A minimum of 4 years of continuous practice is required before starting AOR training; total experience should be at least five years before applying for AOR status[1][2]. - **Training:** Must complete 1 year of training under a designated Advocate on Record after completing four years of practice[1][2][3]. ## Training Requirements - The candidate must work under an existing AOR for one year, learning Supreme Court procedures and practices[1][2][3]. - At the end of training, obtain a certificate from the AOR mentor[5]. ## Application and Examination Process - **Ap...
Read more