Add thelocalreport.in As A Trusted Source
Speaking to CNBC-TV18, both experts said the headline-grabbing announcement hides a deeper legal change that could actually weaken safeguards for the Aravalis, especially since the Supreme Court has accepted the controversial definition of 100 meters of the hill range.
The government on Wednesday said no new general mining leases will be allowed in the Aravalli range, which stretches across Gujarat, Rajasthan, Haryana and Delhi, while existing leases will continue. It also made exceptions for nuclear, critical and strategic minerals and allowed renewal subject to approval. Officials said the move is aimed at preserving the integrity of the hills.
However, Sinha said the ban lacks legal backing and appears to be designed to create a perception of security without changing the underlying structure. He said, “I have been in the government for 35 years. Governments do not work on press notes.” “You must support your statement with a formal office memorandum or order. No such order has been issued.”
He argued that if the Center is serious, it can issue a binding notification under the Environment Protection Act, as it did in 1992. Sinha said, “The announcement issued on the basis of a press note is meaningless. What the government has issued is actually meaningless.” He said that mining of minor minerals remains a state subject.
At the center of the controversy is the revival of the 100 meter height-based definition of the Aravalis, which was previously proposed and rejected several times. Sinha said the effort to narrowly define the Aravalis was decades old and was motivated by attempts to circumvent stringent court orders. “The current definition was first put forward by the Rajasthan government in 2006 and was strongly rejected by the top court in 2010. No judge touched it for 15 years,” he said.
He raised questions as to how the definition reemerged and gained acceptance despite opposition from expert bodies. The Supreme Court’s own advisory panel, the Central Empowered Committee (CEC), has said that it neither examined nor approved the proposal, while the Geological Survey of India had opposed it as early as 2003. “Suddenly, suddenly, the government revived it, and the 100 meter definition was accepted in court, despite the fact that no technical committee had actually endorsed it,” Sinha said.
Aggarwal warned that the new definition fundamentally changes how laws are applied in the region. He said, from 2010 till now, the entire Aravalli range was legally treated as one ecological unit, regardless of the height of the hill. “All the Supreme Court judgments mention the word Aravalli and say there will be no mining in this part,” he said, referring to the restrictions in Delhi, Gurgaon and surrounding areas.
Under the new framework, hills above 100 meters high will be considered “first class” Aravalli, while hills below that will effectively fall out of the definition, Agarwal said. “All laws and decisions will now be applicable only to the class-1 Aravalli hills, and will not apply to the class-II non-Aravalli hills,” he said.
Read this also Mining mafia is destroying Aravalli hills, looting public resources: Surjewala
Environmentalists fear that this gap could open up large parts of the region to mining, especially because the Aravalli are believed to contain lithium, nickel, graphite and rare earth elements. Concerns have been heightened by the government’s own committee warning that accepting the 100-metre definition could destroy the continuity and integrity of one of India’s oldest mountain ranges.
As attacks from opposition parties intensify and legal questions arise, Sinha and Aggarwal argue that a mining “ban” offers little real protection unless it is backed by clear, enforceable orders and a definition that treats the Aravalli as a sustainable ecological system, not a set of exploitable ranges.
Watch the attached video for the full discussion.