NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court has constituted a five-member high-powered committee (HPC) to develop a fresh and scientifically robust definition of the Aravali hills and ranges after putting on hold a previously accepted classification that relied on a controversial 100-metre elevation criterion.
A bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and Vipul M Pancholi entrusted the panel with examining the ecological validity of the earlier definition and assessing its environmental implications.
The committee will be chaired ex officio by the Director General of the Indian Council of Forestry Research and Education. Other members include former Forest Survey of India Director General Subhash Ashutosh, former Geological Survey of India director Rajendra K Sharma, former Ministry of Environment official Brij Mohan Singh Rathore, and former Delhi University botany department head Ashok K Bhatnagar.
The panel has been directed to submit its report by August 31.
However, the composition of the committee has already drawn criticism from environmental activists and petitioners involved in the case. They questioned whether a panel headed by a serving government-linked official could conduct a truly “fair, impartial and independent” assessment of the ecologically sensitive mountain range.
A key responsibility of the committee will be to review the scientific basis of the earlier criteria, including the 100-metre elevation threshold and the 500-metre gap rule used by a previous panel. The Supreme Court had accepted that report in a judgment delivered on November 20 last year but later stayed its operation amid widespread criticism.
The new committee will specifically examine claims that only 1,048 of Rajasthan’s 12,081 identified hills satisfy the 100-metre elevation requirement, potentially leaving thousands of lower hill formations outside environmental protection.
The court has also asked the panel to study whether “sustainable” or “regulated” mining in newly identified Aravali regions could still result in ecological damage despite regulatory safeguards.
Additionally, the committee will undertake a detailed mapping exercise to identify areas that may fall outside protection under any revised definition while considering factors such as biodiversity, ecological connectivity, and ecosystem services.
In its order, the Supreme Court said the committee was expected to provide an objective assessment of the likely environmental consequences of any proposed changes.
“HPC is expected to objectively assess the implications of the measures contemplated and assist this court in determining whether their implementation may give rise to ecological, environmental, or other consequences that may subsequently prove difficult, if not impossible, to reverse,” the bench observed.
The court stressed that the exercise was necessary to prevent further degradation of the Aravali ecosystem and to ensure adequate safeguards for one of India’s oldest mountain ranges.
Two environmental experts — J Krishnaswamy and Laxmikant Sharma — will participate as special invitees. A director-rank officer from the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change will serve as the committee’s member secretary.
Recognising that the outcome could affect multiple stakeholders, including environmental groups, mining lease holders, local communities and NGOs, the Supreme Court has permitted the committee to invite public representations before finalising its recommendations.
The matter is scheduled to be heard again by the Supreme Court on September 7.
