Introduction
The Aravalli Range, stretching across Gujarat, Rajasthan, and Haryana and extending into the NCR region, is one of the oldest mountain ranges in India and one of the most important natural buffers. Notwithstanding rigorous Supreme Court monitoring and historic Court directions in such milestone cases as M.C. Mehta v. Union of India (2004) and the very broad definition of “forests” given in T.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad v. Union of India (1997), there are concerns about the weakening of environmental safeguards on account of recent changes brought into law at the state levels
Key Highlights
- One of the oldest mountain ranges in India
- Spreads across Gujarat, Rajasthan, Haryana and NCR region
- Acts as a crucial natural ecological buffer
- Subject to continuous Supreme Court monitoring
- Facing concerns due to recent state-level legal changes
Judicial Protection: A Brief Overview
The ecological sensitivity of the Aravalli Range has been reaffirmed by the Supreme Court multiple times. In M.C. Mehta v. Union of India (2004), the Court directed the closure of illegal mining activities and associated it with Article 21 of the Indian Constitution; therefore, the right to a clean and healthy environment is an essential component of the right to life. The Godavarman Judgment (1997) has extended the definition of “forest” such that all land classified as “forest” has to be bought before diversion from the Central Government to divert that land under Section 1(A) of the Forest Conservation Act, 1980.
Landmark Judgments
| Case Name | Year | Key Contribution |
|---|---|---|
| M.C. Mehta v. Union of India | 2004 | Closure of illegal mining and linkage of environmental protection with Article 21 |
| T.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad v. Union of India | 1997 | Expanded definition of “forest” and mandated Central Government approval for diversion |
Legal Principles Established
- The right to a clean and healthy environment is part of Article 21
- Strict regulation of mining activities in ecologically sensitive areas
- Broad and inclusive interpretation of the term “forest”
- Mandatory Central Government approval for diversion of forest land under Section 1(A) of the Forest Conservation Act, 1980
The 100-Metre Buffer Policy
To alleviate minor ecological deterioration, the Supreme Court, in its ongoing oversight, created spatial protections to enforce the implementation of protection policies. The 100-meter buffer zone recommended by the MoEFCC/Central Government included measuring all land 100 meters from the Aravalli Mountains as environmentally sensitive and applied for all prohibitions on construction or mining and land-use changes.
- 100 metres from the Aravalli Mountains marked as environmentally sensitive
- Restrictions on construction, mining, and land-use changes
- Policy aimed at preventing ecological degradation
Yet, as the buffer gained notoriety, questions arose about its consistent application as well as its administratively feasible implementation. Because of this, the Court has suspended implementation of the 100-meter zoning standard until it can be reviewed further. The court’s willingness to have flexibility in relation to both environmental protection and federal, governmental, and practical regulations is demonstrated by its decision.
Dilution of State and Legislative Retrogression
The Haryana government appears to be altering how forest land in the Aravalli Hills is defined and has lowered environmental standards drastically. It has provided a pathway to allow the construction of massive real estate developments, expand infrastructure, and conduct mining operations in areas previously identified by the Supreme Court of India as critical elements of an environmentally sensitive area. By changing or excluding large sections of the Aravalli Range, the long-term protection afforded to the ecological integrity of these areas has been dangerously compromised as well as efforts over decades by the judiciary to enforce ecological balance, to prevent desertification, and to protect groundwater recharge areas.
Key Concerns
- Redefinition of forest land in Aravalli Hills
- Lowering of environmental standards
- Expansion of real estate and infrastructure projects
- Increased mining activities in sensitive zones
- Threat to ecological balance and groundwater recharge
The Hon’ble Supreme Court has repeatedly reiterated that no state nor executive action may alter a binding judgment made pursuant to Article 141 of the Constitution, which clearly outlines the binding nature of the Supreme Court’s decisions. The ongoing situation is indicative of the continuing tension inherent in India’s environmental governance because while the courts have established a legal and ecological standard, states will often take steps to circumvent or weaken those protections through state action. Thus, continual court oversight is required to maintain the effective operation and viability of the environment. This ongoing interplay suggests a continual vulnerability of the environment from development pressures and political expedience.
National Trends: Forest Diversion
The Aravalli Controversy, which occurred from 2014 to 2018, highlights a much larger national trend regarding the ongoing challenge to our environment due to forest land increasingly being taken for industrial and/or infrastructure development throughout India.
Examples of Forest Diversion
| Location | Year | Key Issue |
|---|---|---|
| Jharkhand | 2022-2023 | Forest cleared for industrial development including by Adani Group under Forest (Conservation) Act approvals |
| Chhattisgarh (Hasdeo Arand) | 2022-2023 | Ecologically sensitive forest allocated for coal mining; protests by local communities |
| Great Nicobar Islands | 2021-2022 | Expedited clearances for infrastructure in ecologically fragile areas |
For example, in Jharkhand 2022-2023, vast areas of forest were cleared to develop industry, including by Adani Group, while being granted the requisite statutory approvals according to the Forest (Conservation) Act.
In Chhattisgarh (2022-2023), a large portion of the ecologically sensitive Hasdeo Arand forest has been made available to coal mining companies. Local communities have protested against these actions because of their concerns over deforestation and loss of livelihood opportunities.
The Great Nicobar Islands (2021-2022) received expedited clearances for important infrastructure projects located in areas of high ecological fragility. There has been alarm raised by many environmental experts regarding the impact that these clearances would have on the longer-term success of protecting India’s many fragile ecosystems. These examples demonstrate that the trend in India is moving away from protecting fragile ecosystems using substantive approaches to protecting fragile ecosystems and with little emphasis placed on developing a more thorough understanding of the ecology and biodiversity of the affected areas.
Constitutional and Legal Implications
Legal and constitutional requirements in India dictate how the government formulates and implements laws, regulations, and programs. Article 21 of the Indian Constitution states that every citizen has the constitutional right to life. Most states have adopted forest management policies that conflict with national forest policy; state policies, therefore, contradict national policies and cannot be given legal effect.
Environmental Law Principles
Some of the tenets of environmental law (i.e., sustainable development, intergenerational equity, etc.) require the state to manage and protect natural resources for current and future generations. Therefore, the government’s developments in ecologically sensitive areas must be both ecologically sustainable and comply with the Constitution of India.
Development Vs Environment: A False Dichotomy
The myth of ‘development versus environment’ is just that—a myth. Unregulated activities negatively affect fragile areas for the long term by creating many problems, such as climate vulnerability and water shortages, as well as the potential for public health problems stemming from unsafe environmental practices.
- Climate vulnerability
- Water shortages
- Public health risks due to unsafe environmental practices
Courts and other legal systems (like Spatial Protection Safeguards) have put measures in place to ensure that development and protection do not exist in conflict with one another.
Conclusion
The Aravalli Hills serve as the juncture for environmental law, constitutional government, and development policy (including land use, fuel sources, food production, water use, etc.) based on several landmark rulings given by the Hon’ble Supreme Court.
| Key Aspect | Details |
|---|---|
| Legal Foundation | Landmark rulings by the Honorable Supreme Court |
| Government Action | 100-meter buffer zone request by MoEFCC |
| Protection Measures | Orders to stop violations and encroachments |
| Current Risk | Attempts by states to dilute protections |
From this solid foundation, along with the 100-meter buffer zone request made by the Ministry of Environment, Forest, and Climate Change (MoEFCC) and their orders issued to stop violations and encroachments, the Supreme Court has created a strong legal defense for the Aravalli ecosystem. Currently, however, there are attempts by various states to dilute or weaken these protections, therefore putting at risk the continued health of the ecosystem.
The protection of the Aravalli Hills is not just an environmental issue but a constitutional requirement and has ramifications for India’s commitment to sustainable development and the rule of law as it relates to the environment.
