A day after the Centre’s written assurance on long-term protection of the Aravalli ecosystem, the political and environmental controversy surrounding India’s oldest mountain range showed no signs of abating. On Thursday, a sharp war of words broke out between Union Environment Minister Bhupender Yadav and senior Congress leader Jairam Ramesh, with both accusing each other of “misleading and misinforming” the people on the ecologically sensitive range.
The Environment Ministry had on Wednesday announced a ban on the grant of new mining leases and stricter safeguards for existing mines across the Aravallis, stretching from Gujarat to Delhi. However, this failed to buy peace with the Congress and environmentalists again, referring to the contentious new definition of the Aravallis based on a 100-metre elevation threshold and a Forest Survey of India (FSI) study, which Yadav says does not exist.
Citing the purported FSI study, Ramesh said only a small fraction of the Aravallis lies above 100 metres. Yadav rejected the claim, saying: “No FSI study has been conducted, making the claims you are referring to. But I know the reason you are spreading these lies despite FSI issuing a categorical denial.”
Yadav accused the former environment minister of spreading “misinformation” and former Rajasthan chief minister Ashok Gehlot of “plundering” the hills. “You and your coterie are rattled because we have imposed a total ban on mining in the Aravallis from Gujarat to Delhi,” Yadav said, alleging large-scale damage to the Aravallis under previous Congress regimes.
This followed Ramesh again accusing the Union minister of “misleading and misinforming” the public and challenging him to direct the FSI to conduct a formal, transparent study mapping the varying elevations of the hills across 15 districts of Rajasthan and to release the raw data. “The FSI is now under additional charge of the ministry’s ADG and will say whatever the minister wants it to say. FSI’s internal assessment warned the ministry. Is such an assessment being denied? The raw data is very much with FSI,” Ramesh said.
By the end of the day, it was evident that the Centre’s Wednesday assurances had failed to put an end to either the politics or the long-standing trust deficit surrounding the Aravallis, which have been at the centre of decades of litigation over mining, urbanisation and illegal activities. The range plays a critical role in preventing desertification and sustaining groundwater in northwest India and is also believed to contain deposits of critical minerals such as graphite, lithium and rare earth elements, adding to concerns about future commercial exploitation.
The Bhupender Yadav-led ministry had on Wednesday reiterated that the ban on new mining leases would apply uniformly across the entire Aravalli range to preserve the ancient geological ridge and curb illegal mining, which Ramesh described as a “bogus attempt at damage control.” Arguing that the Centre’s “pious proclamations” would not reassure environmentalists or the public as long as the “dangerous” redefinition of the Aravallis remained in place, he pointed out that the 100-metre criterion had earlier been rejected by the FSI, the Supreme Court-mandated Central Empowered Committee, and the court’s amicus curiae.
Environmental groups echoed the concerns, arguing that court orders had already laid down clear protections, and reiterated demands that the entire Aravalli landscape across Gujarat, Rajasthan, Haryana, and Delhi be declared a Critical Ecological Zone. Government officials, meanwhile, said the ministry had directed the Indian Council of Forestry Research and Education (ICFRE) to identify additional zones across the Aravallis where mining should be prohibited beyond already restricted areas.
Under the new definition, an “Aravalli Hill” is classified as a landform rising at least 100 metres above the surrounding terrain, while an “Aravalli Range” is defined as a series of such hills located within 500 metres of each other.