Aravali 100-Metre Definition and New Mining Lease Bar: Supreme Court's 2025 Ruling, Later Kept in Abeyance

The Court dealt with the Aravalis in two proceedings, M.C. Mehta and T.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad (para 11). On 10 January 2024 the Court asked the Central Empowered Committee (CEC) to examine whether some mining fell within the Aravali Hills; the CEC reported on 7 March 2024 (paras 12-18). Because the States used different definitions, an order of 9 May 2024 set up a Committee of the Environment Ministry, the four States' forest departments and expert bodies to frame a uniform one, and meanwhile barred final mining permissions without the Court's leave (paras 20-22). The Committee reported on 3 October 2025 (para 25).

The Court said India's obligations under the desertification convention called for a uniform approach to the Aravali ecosystem, guided by the precautionary principle (paras 4-10). It drew on its recent Saranda Wildlife Sanctuary ruling, where an ICFRE study had separated areas fit for mining from areas needing protection (paras 33-34). The Aravalis, a green barrier against the eastward spread of the Thar Desert, were equally fragile; the Environment Ministry's own note recorded escalating degradation, falling forest cover and damaged aquifers (paras 3, 35-36). With twenty-two wildlife sanctuaries, four tiger reserves, wetlands and aquifers recharging rivers, further mining had to await such a plan (para 40). That a plan for so large an area would take long did not change this: further mining without experts such as ICFRE examining the conservation areas would not serve ecology and environment (paras 41-42). District-wise plans were allowed if the range's continuity and integrity were kept (para 46). The Court declined to stop existing legal mining since, as Pawan Kumar showed, a complete ban breeds illegal mining, mafias and criminalisation (paras 47-48).