New Delhi: The Supreme Court has constituted a five-member high-powered committee to develop a uniform and scientifically sound definition of the ecologically significant Aravalli Range, a move expected to influence future decisions on mining, environmental conservation and land use across the region.
The committee has been directed to submit its report by August 31. The decision was taken by a bench headed by Surya Kant, which emphasised that any future policy concerning the Aravallis must be based on scientific assessment and guided by the principles of environmental protection and sustainable development.
The panel will be chaired by Kanchan Devi, who serves as Director General of the Indian Council of Forestry Research and Education. Other members include former senior officials and experts from forestry, geology, environmental governance and academia. The Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change will appoint a Director-rank officer to serve as the committee’s member secretary.
The Supreme Court has instructed the committee to engage with a broad range of stakeholders, including the governments of Delhi, Rajasthan and Haryana, environmental organisations, mining lease holders, project developers, villagers, farmers and communities that depend on the Aravalli ecosystem for their livelihoods.
According to the court, the panel’s task is to objectively evaluate the environmental and ecological implications of any proposed measures and assist in determining whether future actions could lead to irreversible damage to the region.
Pending the submission of the committee’s findings and the court’s review of its recommendations, the existing ban on mining activities across the Aravalli region will continue. The matter is scheduled for further hearing on September 7.
The issue gained prominence after the Supreme Court last year adopted a definition that classified only landforms rising at least 100 metres above the surrounding terrain as part of the Aravalli system. Environmental groups argued that such criteria could remove protection from a substantial portion of the range, potentially exposing large areas to mining and development pressures.
Following concerns raised by conservationists, the court later stayed its earlier order, citing unresolved ambiguities and the need for a more comprehensive assessment before determining the final definition of the Aravallis.
