Why India's Aravalli Mountain Range Are at the Centre of Escalating Unrest.

Unrest has flared across northern India after the Supreme Court redefined the Aravalli hills – among the planet's most ancient mountain ranges spanning the states of Rajasthan, Haryana, Gujarat, and the capital territory.

As per the revised criteria, accepted by the court following federal government suggestions, an Aravalli hill is any landform rising at least 100 metres (328 ft) above the adjacent land. A cluster of such hills within 500 metres of each other, combined with the land between them, are deemed to be an Aravalli range.

Environmentalists argue that defining Aravalli hills by height could leave many shorter, vegetation-clad but vitally important hills unprotected from quarrying and development.

The federal government, on the other hand, maintains that the revised definition is intended to enhance oversight and establish consistency and not weaken protections.

The Roots of the Unrest

This weekend, peaceful protests occurred in cities such as Gurugram and Udaipur, organized by local residents, farmers, green activists, and, in some cases, lawyers and political groups.

A founder member of a key environmental group stated that the new definition risks undermining the critical role of the Aravalli range in "halting desert expansion, recharging groundwater and safeguarding local economies" in the northwestern region.

The lower, scrub-covered hills play a vital role in stopping desert creep, recharging groundwater and supporting livelihoods according to experts.

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

He pointed out that, globally, mountain ranges 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 combating desertification should be recognised as a component of the system, irrespective of its height."

Protesters are calling for that the government delineate Aravalli areas using scientific criteria, encompassing geography, biodiversity, wildlife connectivity and climate resilience.

One activist warned that the court's new definition could encourage extractive industries, development and business projects, heightening the risk of environmental harm.

Political opponents have stepped up criticism, cautioning that the new definition might lead to serious ecological damage.

A senior politician said that protecting the Aravallis is "fundamentally linked to 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 become a desert."

What Does the Government Say?

India's central government has attempted to minimize these concerns.

In a official release, it asserted the new definition is intended to bolster governance and bring uniformity, noting that a single, objective definition was required to regulate mining consistently across states.

It added that the new definition encompasses the whole mountainous region – incorporating slopes, related features, and intervening areas – explicitly protecting hill clusters and their linkages.

The national environment department said it is wrong 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 prohibited in core "protected" areas – reserved woodlands, eco-sensitive zones, and wetlands – except for certain essential, national security, and nuclear minerals allowed by law.

The Environment Minister said only about two percent of the vast Aravalli range might be open to extraction, and only after comprehensive assessments and formal clearance.

Nevertheless, many of the protesting groups say that protests will persist and that they are considering judicial avenues to contest the court's new definition.