The Reason The Nation's Aravalli Mountain Range Are at the Centre of Escalating Protests.

Unrest has flared across northern India after the nation's top court issued a new definition for the Aravalli hills – one of the world's oldest geological formations spanning the states of Rajasthan, Haryana, Gujarat, and Delhi.

Under the new definition, accepted by the court following federal government suggestions, an Aravalli hill is any geographical feature 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 deemed to be an Aravalli range.

Environmentalists argue that defining Aravalli hills by height potentially excludes numerous shorter, vegetation-clad but vitally important hills unprotected from mining and construction.

The federal government, on the other hand, states that the revised definition is meant to enhance oversight and bring uniformity and not weaken safeguards.

What is Sparking the Demonstrations?

This weekend, calm demonstrations occurred in cities such as Gurugram and Udaipur, organized by community members, farmers, green activists, and, in some cases, lawyers and political groups.

A founder member of a prominent conservation collective remarked that the new definition risks undermining the critical role of the Aravalli range in "preventing desertification, recharging groundwater and safeguarding local economies" in the northwestern region.

The shorter, vegetated hills play a vital role in preventing desertification, boosting water tables and supporting livelihoods as per experts.

"This mountain system must not be categorized by height alone, but by its ecological, geological and climatic role," said an ecology advocate associated with the campaign to save the Aravallis.

He said that, internationally, mountain ranges are identified by the functions they perform, not by random height benchmarks.

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

Activists are demanding that the government define Aravalli areas using scientific criteria, including geography, ecology, wildlife connectivity and climate resilience.

A campaigner cautioned that the court's new definition might promote extractive industries, development and business projects, increasing the risk of ecological damage.

Political opponents have stepped up criticism, cautioning that the new definition could cause significant environmental degradation.

One political leader declared that safeguarding the Aravallis is "fundamentally linked to Delhi's survival." A different official called the range the state's "lifeline," stating that without it, "a vast region up to Delhi would have become a desert."

What Does the Government Say?

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

In a recent statement, it asserted the new definition is meant to bolster governance and bring uniformity, noting that a single, objective definition was required to oversee extraction consistently across states.

It added that the new definition covers the whole mountainous region – including slopes, related features, and connecting zones – clearly safeguarding hill clusters and their linkages.

The federal environment ministry clarified it is wrong to assume that mining will be permitted on all landforms under 100 metres.

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

It added that mining remains banned in core "inviolate" areas – reserved woodlands, eco-sensitive zones, and wetlands – except for certain essential, national security, and nuclear minerals allowed by law.

The minister responsible for ecology said only about 2% of the 147,000 sqkm Aravalli range could potentially be mined, and only after detailed studies and formal clearance.

Nevertheless, several of the protesting groups contend that protests will persist and that they are exploring judicial avenues to contest the court's new definition.