New Delhi, December 29, 2025: The Supreme Court on Monday kept in abeyance its November 20 verdict that had accepted a uniform definition of the Aravalli hills and ranges, observing that the matter requires deeper examination and further clarification.
A vacation bench led by Chief Justice Surya Kant, along with Justices J K Maheshwari and Augustine George Masih, said it was inclined to constitute a high-powered committee of domain experts to undertake a comprehensive and holistic review of the issue. The bench made the observation while hearing a suo motu case titled In Re: Definition of Aravalli Hills and Ranges and Ancillary Issues.
The court directed that the recommendations of the earlier committee, along with the findings and directions contained in the November 20, 2025 judgment, would remain in abeyance until the matter is re-examined. It noted that several aspects of the definition require clarification and issued notices to the Centre and other stakeholders. The case has been listed for further hearing on January 21.
In its earlier order, the apex court had accepted a uniform definition of the Aravalli hills and ranges and imposed a ban on granting fresh mining leases in the region spanning Delhi, Haryana, Rajasthan and Gujarat, pending expert reports. The decision was aimed at protecting the Aravalli range, regarded as the world’s oldest mountain system.
The November verdict had relied on the recommendations of a committee formed by the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change. The committee had defined an “Aravalli Hill” as any landform in designated Aravalli districts with an elevation of 100 metres or more above local relief, while an “Aravalli Range” was described as a cluster of two or more such hills located within 500 metres of each other. It had also stated that the entire landform enclosed by the lowest contour, including supporting slopes and associated features, would be treated as part of the Aravalli hills.
With the ruling now kept on hold, the Supreme Court’s proposed expert panel is expected to reassess the scientific, environmental and legal aspects of the definition before the matter is taken up again.
