New Delhi: The Supreme Court’s decision to put in abeyance its earlier judgment redefining the Aravalli range has triggered rare agreement across political lines, with leaders from both the ruling alliance and the Opposition, along with environmentalists and conservation experts, welcoming the move as a crucial pause in a contentious and high-stakes debate over one of India’s most fragile ecological systems.

On Monday, the apex court stayed its November 20 order that had accepted an expert committee’s recommendation to define the Aravallis purely on the basis of elevation. Under that earlier ruling, only landforms rising at least 100 metres above the local relief — measured from the lowest contour encircling a landform to its peak — would qualify as part of the Aravalli hills. Critics had warned that such a narrow, height-based definition risked excluding large stretches of low-lying hills, ridges and undulating terrain that form the continuous geological and ecological system of the Aravallis, potentially opening them up to mining and real estate development.

The matter was taken up suo motu by a bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justices J.K. Maheshwari and A.G. Masih. The court not only put the November 20 ruling in abeyance but also proposed the constitution of a high-powered expert committee to reassess concerns surrounding the height-based definition, ecological continuity of the Aravalli range and the scope of permissible mining activities.

Union environment minister Bhupender Yadav welcomed the Supreme Court’s directions and pledged full cooperation from his ministry. In a post on X, Yadav said he supported the stay on the earlier order and the proposal to set up a new expert committee. “We stand committed to extending all assistance sought from the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change in the protection and restoration of the Aravalli range,” he said, adding that, as matters currently stand, a complete ban on mining continues with respect to new mining leases and the renewal of old ones.

However, while the Opposition also welcomed the stay, it simultaneously sharpened its attack on the government, arguing that the Supreme Court’s move amounted to a rejection of the position consistently taken by the environment minister in support of redefining the Aravallis. Senior Congress leader and former environment minister Jairam Ramesh described the court’s directive as a “flicker of hope” for conservation efforts but said the larger struggle to protect the Aravallis was far from over.

“The Indian National Congress welcomes the directives given by the Supreme Court on the redefinition of the Aravallis being pushed through by the Modi government,” Ramesh said. He pointed out that the elevation-based definition had faced opposition not just from environmental activists but also from key expert bodies, including the Forest Survey of India, the Supreme Court’s own Central Empowered Committee and even the court-appointed amicus curiae. “There is now a temporary respite, but the struggle to save the Aravallis from the machinations of the Modi government to open it up to mining, real estate and other activities will have to be resisted in a sustained manner,” he added.

Ramesh went further, demanding Bhupender Yadav’s resignation. According to him, the Supreme Court’s decision to stay the earlier ruling amounted to a repudiation of the arguments the minister had advanced in favour of the redefinition. “The Union Minister for Environment, Forests and Climate Change must resign immediately. It is a rejection of all the arguments he has been giving in favour of the redefinition,” Ramesh said.

Shiv Sena (UBT) leader Aaditya Thackeray also welcomed the Supreme Court’s intervention, calling the relief significant but cautioning that it must ultimately be made permanent. In a post on X, Thackeray said that while the stay was a major step, it was equally important to ensure that misinformation about the Aravallis being “safe” did not go unchallenged. “The Aravalli Range is not safe with the government’s intent to redefine it and sell it off,” he said, stressing the need for the strongest possible legal and ecological protection for the range.

The controversy over the Aravallis has been building for weeks, particularly after the environment ministry convened a meeting on December 8 to initiate groundwork for delineating Aravalli areas “as per the definition accepted by the Supreme Court on November 20”. That exercise was intended to form the baseline for a Management Plan for Sustainable Mining (MPSM) for the entire Aravalli range, to be prepared through the Indian Council of Forestry Research and Education (ICFRE). With the Supreme Court now putting the earlier definition on hold, that delineation process is expected to be paused until the court settles the issue definitively.

Environmental experts and conservationists have consistently argued that the Aravallis — among the oldest mountain ranges in the world — cannot be reduced to a simplistic height-based formula. They stress that the range functions as a continuous ecological entity, playing a critical role in groundwater recharge, moderating air pollution, supporting biodiversity and acting as a natural barrier against desertification in northwestern India.

R.P. Balwan, a former Indian Forest Service officer who has filed a review petition against the November 20 order, described the court’s decision to hold the judgment in abeyance as a welcome step. He warned that fragmenting the Aravallis based on vertical limits in such a fragile ecosystem would inevitably lead to its destruction. “Once biodiversity is finished, no one can revive it due to the prevalent harsh environmental factors,” Balwan said. He emphasised that the Aravallis do not require a new definition at all, noting that the range is already well defined in geological terms as a stratigraphic succession, with each rock unit and structure clearly identified.

Forest analyst Chetan Agarwal said attention would now shift to the composition and terms of reference of the high-powered expert committee proposed by the Supreme Court. According to him, the credibility and effectiveness of the committee would depend on whether it adopts a holistic understanding of the Aravallis as a living ecosystem rather than viewing it through narrow technical parameters. “It is hoped that the new committee looks at the Aravallis as an ecological entity — a living, breathing habitat that provides the little remaining forest cover, a home for the last vestiges of wildlife, and plays a crucial role in moderating air pollution and enhancing groundwater recharge,” Agarwal said. He also called for transparency and wide public consultations in the committee’s functioning.

The Supreme Court’s intervention has, for now, halted a process that many feared would irreversibly weaken protections for the Aravallis. Yet, as political leaders, experts and activists have all noted, the stay is only temporary. The final outcome will depend on how the court balances development pressures with ecological imperatives, and whether the proposed expert committee is able to provide an assessment that recognises the Aravallis not merely as a set of hills defined by elevation, but as a complex and irreplaceable ecological system that underpins environmental stability across large parts of northern and western India.