Why The Nation's Aravalli Hills Have Become the Epicenter of Increasing Protests.

Protests have erupted across the northern part of the country after the Supreme Court redefined the Aravalli hills – among the planet's most ancient mountain ranges spanning the states of Rajasthan, Haryana, Gujarat, and Delhi.

Under the new definition, endorsed by the court following central government recommendations, an Aravalli hill is any landform with a minimum elevation of 100 metres (328 ft) from the surrounding terrain. Two or more such hills less than half a kilometre of each other, combined with the land between them, are considered an Aravalli range.

Environmentalists argue that classifying Aravalli hills based on elevation potentially excludes many shorter, vegetation-clad but vitally important hills vulnerable to quarrying and development.

The central administration, however, states that the new definition is designed to tighten controls and establish consistency and not dilute protections.

The Roots of the Unrest

Recently, calm demonstrations took place in cities including Gurugram and Udaipur, led by community members, farmers, green activists, and, at times, lawyers and political parties.

A founder member of a prominent environmental group commented that the new definition risks undermining the essential function of the Aravalli range in "preventing desertification, replenishing aquifers and safeguarding local economies" in the northwestern region.

The lower, scrub-covered hills perform a crucial function in stopping desert creep, recharging groundwater and supporting livelihoods as per experts.

"This mountain system must not be categorized by height alone, but by its ecological, geological and climatic purpose," said an environmental activist involved in the campaign to preserve the Aravallis.

He added that, globally, mountain ranges are identified by the functions they perform, not by arbitrary elevation thresholds.

"Any feature that is structurally a component of the Aravalli system and plays a critical role in ecology or preventing desertification should be recognised as part of the range, irrespective of its height."

Activists are demanding that the government delineate Aravalli areas using scientific criteria, encompassing geography, biodiversity, animal corridors and climate resilience.

A campaigner cautioned that the court's new definition could encourage mining, construction and commercial activity, increasing the threat of ecological damage.

Political opponents have ramped up their censure, cautioning that the new definition could cause serious ecological damage.

A senior politician declared that safeguarding the Aravallis is "inseparable from Delhi's survival." A different official called the range the state's "life-support system," stating that without it, "the entire area up to Delhi would have turned into a desert."

The Government's Stance

India's central government has sought to downplay these apprehensions.

In a recent statement, it said the new definition is meant to strengthen regulation and bring uniformity, adding that a clear, unambiguous definition was required to regulate mining uniformly across states.

It added that the new definition encompasses the entire hill system – including slopes, associated landforms, and intervening areas – clearly safeguarding hill clusters and their connections.

The federal environment ministry said it is incorrect to presume that mining will be allowed on all landforms under 100 metres.

The government says areas inside the Aravalli hills or ranges are excluded from new mining leases, while current operations can continue if they adhere to sustainable mining norms.

It noted that mining remains banned in core "protected" areas – protected forests, eco-sensitive zones, and wetlands – except for certain critical, strategic, and atomic minerals permitted by law.

The Environment Minister said only about 2% of the 147,000 sqkm Aravalli range might be open to extraction, and only after detailed studies and formal clearance.

However, several of the demonstrating organizations contend that protests will persist and that they are considering judicial avenues to challenge the court's new definition.