Protests have erupted across the northern part of the country after the nation's top court redefined the Aravalli hills – among the planet's most ancient mountain ranges stretching across the states of Rajasthan, Haryana, Gujarat, and the capital territory.
According to the fresh parameters, endorsed by the court based on federal government suggestions, an Aravalli hill is any geographical feature rising at least 100 metres (328 ft) above the surrounding terrain. A cluster of such hills less than half a kilometre of each other, along with the land between them, are deemed to be an Aravalli range.
Ecologists assert that defining Aravalli hills based on elevation risks leaving numerous shorter, vegetation-clad but vitally important hills vulnerable to quarrying and development.
The federal government, however, states that the revised definition is designed to enhance oversight and bring uniformity and not dilute protections.
What is Sparking the Demonstrations?
Over the past few days, calm demonstrations took place in cities including Gurugram and Udaipur, led by local residents, farmers, environmental activists, and, at times, lawyers and political parties.
A founder member of a prominent conservation collective stated that the new definition risks undermining the critical role of the Aravalli range in "preventing desertification, replenishing aquifers and protecting livelihoods" in northwest India.
The lower, scrub-covered hills perform a crucial function in stopping desert creep, boosting water tables and supporting livelihoods according to experts.
"This mountain system should not be defined solely by elevation, but by its ecological, geological and climatic function," noted an environmental activist involved in the movement to save the Aravallis.
He pointed out that, internationally, mountains and hill systems are identified by the functions they perform, not by random height benchmarks.
"Any feature that is geologically part of the Aravalli system and serves a vital purpose in ecology or preventing desertification must be acknowledged as part of the range, regardless of its height."
Protesters are calling for that the government delineate Aravalli areas using research-based parameters, including topography, biodiversity, animal corridors and climate resilience.
A campaigner cautioned that the court's new definition could encourage mining, construction and commercial activity, heightening the risk of ecological damage.
Opposition parties have ramped up their censure, cautioning that the new definition might lead to serious ecological damage.
One political leader said that safeguarding the Aravallis is "inseparable from Delhi's survival." A different official called the range the state's "life-support system," adding that without it, "the entire area up to Delhi would have turned into a desert."
What Does the Government Say?
India's federal government has attempted to minimize these concerns.
In a recent statement, it asserted the new definition is intended to bolster governance and bring uniformity, noting that a clear, unambiguous definition was required to regulate mining uniformly across states.
It further stated that the new definition covers the whole mountainous region – including slopes, related features, and connecting zones – clearly safeguarding hill clusters and their linkages.
The national environment department said it is wrong to assume that mining will be allowed on all landforms under 100 metres.
The government states areas within the Aravalli hills or ranges are excluded from new mining leases, while existing ones can continue if they follow sustainable mining norms.
It noted that mining remains prohibited in core "inviolate" areas – protected forests, eco-sensitive zones, and wetlands – aside from certain essential, national security, and nuclear minerals permitted by law.
The Environment Minister said only about 2% of the vast Aravalli range could potentially be mined, and only after detailed studies and official approval.
However, many of the protesting groups contend that demonstrations will continue and that they are considering legal options to contest the court's new definition.
