SC Rejects Aravallis High Power Committee’s Request to Extend Deadline For Final Report By Six Months

New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Monday (September 7) rejected a High Power Committee’s (HPC's) – appointed by the apex court in June this year – request to extend the deadline for its final report on the definition, delineation, conservation and management of the Aravalli hills by six months.

The deadline to submit the final report expired on August 31. On the same day, the HPC had submitted a compliance report to the Supreme Court requesting that the deadline for the final report be moved to February 28 next year. The Aravalli hill range is a complex, interconnected system and cannot be delineated using a single, terrain-based yardstick alone, and understanding the issues in the landscape calls for additional work, including more scientific analyses as well as expert and stakeholder consultations, the Committee had said.

'Work day and night'

As per a report by Bar And Bench on September 7, a Bench comprising the Chief Justice of India CJI Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V. Mohana “took exception” to the request, and said it was an attempt to keep the issue in cold storage till CJI Kant demits office.

“The committee has basically asked for an adjournment till my retirement,” the Bar And Bench reported quoted the CJI Kant as saying at the hearing. CJI Kant is set to retire from office on February 9, 2027.

In response to additional solicitor general Aishwarya Bhati’s response that an interim report has been prepared already, the CJI said that the Committee should submit a final report, and not “merely an interim report”.

Though ASG Bhati said that hearing all stakeholders would require more time, the court has directed the HPC to “work day and night” if needed, and submit its report by November 30. No further extension will be granted, Bar And Bench quoted the court as saying. 

The bench also said that the Committee must hear all stakeholders, including tribal communities in Rajasthan and Gujarat, and may submit issue-specific interim reports to enable the Court to resolve urgent questions separately. 

The case is now listed for December 2.

The Committee’s request for more time

On August 31, the HPC in its compliance report to the Supreme Court had said that its work so far including consultations with stakeholders via a ‘Rapid Field Assessment’ August 6-11 showed that the Aravallis mostly constitutes, “a connected landscape with interlinked ecological, hydrological, biodiversity and socio-cultural values”. It therefore cannot be defined using a single terrain-based yardstick, the Committee had said.

The Committee had therefore proposed an “Ecosystem-Based Framework” that would take into account the forests in the Aravallis, its biodiversity, ecological connectivity, the ecosystem services it provides to downstream areas, and the local communities and human settlements it supports. This, however, would mean more work, the Committee had said, including more expert and local stakeholder interactions. This was the main reason why the Committee had asked for an extension of six months.

Leaders and members of the opposition in Aravalli-range states as well as activists had already raised concerns regarding the lack of thorough consultations in these states by the HPC, and had called for the Committee to ask for an extension from the Supreme Court.

In fact, scientist Ravi Chopra who has chaired two SC-appointed HPCs on the impact of dams in the Upper Ganga basin and the impact of the Char Dham Project in Uttarakhand said that the extensive travel for several weeks throughout the affected regions meant that both Committees he chaired had to ask for extensions. 

“As the chairperson, I requested the court for extra time, citing the work we had done. In both cases, the court graciously accepted the requests,” he had written in his email to the HPC last month.

The Supreme Court had appointed the current five-member HPC on June 3 following widespread protests across the Aravallis in December 2025 against the new definition for the hill range that was accepted by a previous committee and recommended by the Union environment ministry. Locals and conservationists feared that it would open up a large part of the hill range to extractive activities including mining.

Why is the court in a hurry, ask activists

Why is the Supreme Court in a “hurry” for the Aravallis High Power Committee’s final report, activists have asked in response to the Chief Justice of India Surya Kant’s refusal on September 7 to grant the six-month extension that the Committee had requested for.

“Why is the Supreme Court in such a hurry that Chief Justice Surya Kant cannot grant a six-month extension? Mistakes done by the previous CJI, B.R. Gavai, are being again repeated by the current Chief Justice where he wants to give a decision regarding the Aravallis in a hurry before his term ends,” Diwan Singh, co-founder, Aravalli Virasat Jan Abhiyaan, said in a statement.

“Why should the Committee work day and night to submit a report that needs scientific rigour and time just so that Chief Justice Surya Kant gets to pass the order which will decide the fate of the Aravallis before he retires in early February 2027. It took billions of years for the Aravallis to be formed.”

Singh cited the example of the Western Ghats Ecology Expert Panel, which took a year before it recommended that the Western Ghats be declared as an ‘ecologically sensitive area’. The Panel followed a structured process, with 40 consultations with civil society groups, 8 consultations with government agencies, 7 brainstorming sessions and 14 field visits. Its database, meeting minutes and supporting material were made publicly accessible so that the basis of the Panel’s recommendations could be examined.

“The Aravallis deserve nothing less…All these things need time and should certainly not be rushed,” Singh said.

The Wire is now on WhatsApp. Follow our channel for sharp analysis and opinions on the latest developments.