There is widespread misinformation being spread about the Aravalli mining order, so let’s put the verified facts on record. A clarification has been issued by the Press Information Bureau, based directly on the judgment of the Supreme Court of India. First, this Supreme Court order was not passed to... destroy the Aravallis, but to protect them. For years, multiple cases of illegal and unregulated mining were coming to the Court because different States were using different definitions of what counts as an Aravalli hill or range. Now the most important fact. The so-called 100-metre rule is not new. It was decided by a Rajasthan State Committee in 2002 and implemented in 2006. Under this rule, any landform rising 100 metres or more above surrounding land is treated as a hill, and mining is banned not just on the hilltop but also on its slopes, treating the entire hill as one ecological unit. The expert committee appointed by the Supreme Court found that Rajasthan was the only State with a clear, legally notified and scientific definition. Because of this, Gujarat, Haryana and the Delhi region agreed to adopt the same rule, along with stronger safeguards, so that one uniform standard applies across the entire Aravalli belt. Another major misinformation is that mining is now allowed below 100 metres. This is false. Many areas below 100 metres are still part of protected hills, connected ranges, wildlife corridors and eco-sensitive zones, where mining remains prohibited. For the first time, entire Aravalli ranges, meaning groups of nearby hills and the land between them, are being treated as one protected ecological system, so slopes and foothills cannot be mined separately. Finally, the Supreme Court has imposed a temporary stay on all new mining leases in the Aravalli region until a comprehensive Sustainable Mining Management Plan is prepared. Existing mines can continue only under strict environmental compliance. In short, the rule was old, the protection has been strengthened, and fresh mining has been paused, not expanded.show more

Sun be,na to SC aur nahi tu yaha rahta hai, hamko patta he illegal mining ne kitna barbad kiya he Aravalli ko, aur ab yr rule lakr, inn illegal miner, bhi mafiya ko, open permission de di he, tu jimedri lega? Agr kuch bhi galt hona start huaa to? Gawar khi kr jata inki halat dekh

Why misinformation was allowed to spread.. once confusion is created ppl do not understand who is right and what is wrong ..

What if adani starts mining, what can you do. Adani destroyed forests in other states. No reports are in because adani owns half the media.

Sir, read that document and tell me what will happen to a standalone hill less than 100 meters? Something like this 👇

Sure, the 100-metre rule isn't "new"—it's been Rajasthan's loophole-ridden standard since the early 2000s, conveniently allowing mining lobbies to nibble away at everything shorter.

Oh, bravo! What a masterful piece of government spin—straight from the PIB's propaganda playbook, no doubt. Let's all applaud this "clarification" that paints the Supreme Court's Aravalli order as some heroic eco-savior move.

Hahaha sarkari toolkit active ho gai Bhai Andaman Deforestation and Mahendragarh Afforestation ke bre me bhee bta na jo 1 saal pehle hi ho gya hai 6 districts me is Aravali 100 order ki aad me jo land stone crushers ko bechi gai hai after 3000 cr grant

Make a law, no mining. No need for paid explaination

Baklol, Word salad apne pichwade mein daal le, Aravali is our heritage it fucking protects Haryana Rajasthan from becoming barren. Govt has been colluding with SC to do all kinds mischief, They will be taught a lesson like Ethanol Factory in Hanuman Garh

In that case, please explain why the Amicus Curiae has made the cautionary statement about the dangers to the environment due to the new rules and guidelines? Where was the need for this new 100 metre definition of the Aravalli Hills, which is now the source of Controversy, Confusion and Fear among the Bharatvasis? The GoI and #SupremeCourtOfIndia must issue a written statement clarifying that “No additional mining or construction or commercial activities of any kind will be permitted in the existing Aravalli Hills, and status-quo will be maintained”. आम भारतवासियों के लिए यह मुद्दा बहुत ही संवेदनशील और चिंताजनक है। @PMOIndia @narendramodi @moefcc @byadavbjp

How are you protecting them when you are removing 90% of the hills from the definition of aravallis.

There's no misinformation. For God's sake, wake up your consciousness. 🤦‍♂️🤦‍♂️ @grok how much % of aravali is below 100m ?

Accepting the #Aravalli definition based on the FSI–CEC 2010 exercise, when a comprehensive, contemporary survey of the Aravalli range is admittedly yet to be carried out, is neither scientifically nor legally justified. The 2010 mapping was forest-centric, limited and advisory in nature, not a landscape-level ecological assessment of hills, ridges, groundwater recharge zones and desert-barrier functions. Relying on such outdated data to finally redefine and shrink protection of a fragile mountain system—despite the Supreme Court itself recording disappearance of several Aravalli hills in later years—violates the precautionary principle and raises serious concerns under Article 21. A final definition could only have been justified after completion of a fresh, Aravalli-specific, multidisciplinary ecological study, not before it.

And like clockwork, here comes the bhosadpappu army to justify and defend another masterstroke

Have some shame, hiw much money u got for this tweet. Go and check ur fact first the Rajasthan high court who issue against adani was transferred then new jidge were appoint to pass for the issue. Shame on people like you

This is bullshit, 100 se upar wali bhi protrcted rhegi, usse neeche wali bhi, to sabko eksaath include kyu nhi kia? Why two different definitions? Wht it took so many days if it was clear to the government? Env minister is saying 100meter is base length and not hight.

Who trust decisions of any institution under @narendramodi regime ?

Take the judgement back We don't want any judgement on Aravalli Leave Aravalli as it is Go back Modi

This is how Dalal defended there step father

Don't fool us First 100 meter rule passed Then SC recommendation for mining in line below 100 All are paid defence Identified these elements

How can person even find a excuse to just detoriate environment

You have already sold your soul for money. Third rate fellow. Shame on you.

Instead of planting more trees &protecting the existing flora, mining is being allowed under ambiguous rules .No body is going to stick to .19 %. In fact mining ,digging is going on despite honorable court's orders. Forget data. Not even 1 % should be touched. @talk2anuradha

Tu khud ko bhi bech dega na?

Illegally mining needs small machineries.. But industrialist wants more resources with legal permission and needs big machineries. Wah bhai wah coverup toh wah

Aa gaye cover up karne ...

come to Bundi, Jaipur. hills above 100m are being mined mindlessly

Log pagal hain rajasthan k jo jail ja rhe hain protest mein aur tu bjp ka chamcha sahi hai

thread hides the core of the Supreme Court judgment dated 20 Nov 2025 (WP(C) 202/1995). Yes, the 100-metre rule is old. That’s exactly why the Amicus Curiae warned the Court that relying on a height-only definition risks opening large low-height Aravalli formations to mining, breaking the continuity and integrity of the range. The Court did not certify that “90% Aravallis are safe” or that only “0.19% is minable.” These figures are not judicial findings. Instead, the Court recorded “escalating degradation pressures,” stopped all new mining leases, and ordered a fresh, scientific MPSM by ICFRE because existing definitions were insufficient. Selling future safeguards as present safety is not fact-checking. It’s spin. #SaveAravalli #SupremeCourt #EnvironmentalLaw #AravalliProtection

No the issue is not about base and top. It's about 100 m which should be reduced to 10m. Environment ministry must set this as base.

Here comes ‘BJParty ka chuppa’ 🤣🤣

BJP Agent

Conveniently tell half truth. 2010 rule , SC rejected defination of 2010 which was purposed by earlier govt. Now suddenly it is again purposed and accepted

Aa gaye inke paltu kutte bhokne.. Koi R@pist inki m@@ c*od de toh uske bhi benifits gina denge ye bhadwe dalal #SaveAravalli