The consultation on the Aravallis ended on Tuesday with a question that goes beyond the 21-day deadline — How much of the hill range was actually within reach of the public exercise?
Green groups and local communities are raising concerns that the fresh public consultation conducted by the Supreme Court-appointed High-Powered Committee (HPC) was centred only on four cities, even though official maps show the Aravalli range spreads across a much larger area.
Aravalli Range Maps Show Wide Geographical Spread
A Forest Survey of India (FSI) document on the Aravalli region, which is with The Tribune, contains district-wise hill maps covering areas across Rajasthan, Haryana, Gujarat, Delhi and Uttar Pradesh.
The annexure lists 19 districts including Ajmer, Alwar, Banswara, Bharatpur, Bhilwara, Bundi, Chittorgarh, Dausa, Dungarpur, Faridabad, Gurugram, Jaipur, Karauli, Mahendragarh, Nuh, Pali, Rajsamand, Sikar and Udaipur.
This geographical spread stands in sharp contrast to the limited scope of the consultation exercise, which activists say did not reach most of the communities living in these areas.
Green Groups Question Limited Consultation Reach
Against that geographical spread, activists and local communities are questioning why the fresh public consultation conducted by the HPC was centred only on four cities.
The concern is straightforward — if the Aravalli range spans such a vast area across multiple states, why were the consultation sessions not held in more locations to actually reach the people who live in and around these hills?
According to The Tribune, the consultation process has left many rural communities feeling left out of a decision-making exercise that directly affects their land and livelihoods.
What the Aravalli Consultation Means for Local Communities
The Aravalli range is not just a geographical feature — it is home to numerous rural communities whose lives are tied to the hills. The FSI maps make it clear that the range touches districts in at least five states, each with its own local population that has a stake in how the Aravallis are managed.
When consultations are restricted to just four cities, these communities argue, their voices are effectively excluded from the process. The HPC's mandate is to gather public input, but the limited reach raises questions about how representative that input actually is.
- The FSI document covers hill maps for districts across Rajasthan, Haryana, Gujarat, Delhi and Uttar Pradesh
- At least 19 districts are listed in the annexure of the Aravalli region document
- The consultation was conducted by the Supreme Court-appointed High-Powered Committee
- Green groups and local communities are questioning the limited reach of the exercise
Our Take: Consultation Must Match the Scale of the Aravalli Range
To put it plainly — if the maps show the Aravallis spread across 19 districts in five states, then a consultation limited to four cities simply does not add up.
The Forest Survey of India's own document makes the scale of the range clear. The people living in Ajmer, Udaipur, Nuh, or any of the other listed districts have just as much right to be heard as those in the four cities where the consultations were held.
In our view, this is a fundamental flaw in the consultation process. When a decision-making body is tasked with gathering public input, it has a responsibility to reach the affected communities — not just the ones that are easiest to access. The green groups are right to raise this issue, and the HPC should explain why the consultation did not match the geographical spread shown in the FSI maps.
The question that remains after the 21-day deadline is a fair one: How much of the Aravalli range was actually within reach of the public exercise? Based on the evidence, the answer appears to be — not enough.