New Delhi: Following the huge uproar and outrage against the new definition for the Aravallis – which the Supreme Court accepted on November 20 – the Union environment ministry on Wednesday (December 24) announced that it has issued directions to states that the hill range spans to implement a “complete ban” on granting any new mining leases in the Aravallis.However, this is not new.This is merely what the Supreme Court necessitated that the Union environment ministry do, in its order dated November 20 – the same order in which it accepted a uniform new definition of the Aravallis, that only hills above a local relief of 100 metres or more, among others, would qualify as the Aravalli hill range.With environmentalists raising concerns that this could mean that a large part of the hill range would be opened up to mining, widespread protests have occurred in Rajasthan over the past week. Opposition parties have also lent support to the protests and the issue also garnered extensive media coverage.No new mining leasesThere will be a “complete ban” on granting any new mining leases across the Aravallis in all four states that the hill range spans and this “applies uniformly across the entire Aravalli landscape and is intended to preserve the integrity of the range”, a press release by the ministry on December 24 said.“The directions are aimed at safeguarding the Aravallis as a continuous geological ridge extending from Gujarat to the National Capital Region, and at stopping all unregulated mining activities,” it said.It also added that the ministry has directed the Indian Council of Forestry Research and Education (ICFRE, an autonomous institute under the Union environment ministry) to identify additional areas or zones across the entire length of the Aravallis where mining should be prohibited, “over and above the areas already prohibited for mining by the Centre, based on ecological, geological and landscape-level considerations”.Per the release, the ICFRE will undertake this exercise while also preparing a comprehensive, science-based Management Plan for Sustainable Mining (MPSM) for the entire Aravalli region.The ministry has said that this plan will be placed in the public domain “for wide stakeholder consultation”, and that it “will assess the cumulative environmental impact and ecological carrying capacity, identify ecologically sensitive and conservation-critical areas, and lay down measures for restoration and rehabilitation”.This move, according to the ministry, will “enlarge the coverage of areas protected and prohibited from mining in the entire Aravallis, keeping in mind the local topography, ecology and biodiversity”.“The Centre has also directed that for the mines already in operation, the State Governments concerned shall ensure strict compliance with all environmental safeguards and in conformity with the Supreme Court’s order. Ongoing mining activities are to be regulated stringently, with additional restrictions, to ensure environmental protection and adherence to sustainable mining practices. The Government of India stands fully committed towards long-term protection of the Aravalli ecosystem, recognising its critical role in preventing desertification, conserving biodiversity, recharging aquifers, and environmental services for the region,” the ministry said.Not newHowever, this ban is not new. And neither are the ‘directions’ that the ministry has given in the press release.These are merely what the Supreme Court had already asked the Union environment ministry to do in its order dated November 20.In this order, the court noted that the ICFRE study commissioned by the ministry for the Saranda Wildlife Sanctuary in Jharkhand (pertaining to a different case that the court heard) also contained an MPSM for Saranda and Chaibasa in the state.The ICFRE’s “geo-referenced ecological assessment enabled the identification of areas suitable for mining, areas requiring strict ecological protection and zones where biodiversity values necessitated conservation priority”, the court had noted.It therefore directed the Union environment ministry to do the same – develop an MPSM – for the Aravallis too, saying that it would be in “the best interest of the ecology and environment” of the Aravallis that a similar study be done for the hill range.The MPSM must “identify permissible areas for mining, ecologically sensitive, conservation-critical and restoration-priority areas within the Aravali landscape where mining shall be strictly prohibited or permitted only under exceptional and scientifically justified circumstances”, the court had directed.The plan must “incorporate a thorough analysis of cumulative environmental impacts and the ecological carrying capacity of the region” and include “detailed post-mining restoration and rehabilitation measures”, it had said.The court had clearly directed that until the MPSM is finalised, no new mining leases should be granted: “We further direct that till the MPSM is finalised by the MoEF&CC [Union environment ministry] through ICFRE, no new mining leases should be granted.”It added that once the MPSM is finalised, mining will be permitted only as per the plan. During this time, mining activities in mines that are already in operation “would be continued in strict compliance” with the recommendations made by the committee that developed the new definition of the Aravallis, the court had also directed.‘Ministry’s release is misleading’A citizens’ programme called the Aravalli Virasat Jan Abhiyaan (which was formed under the banner of the People for Aravallis, a citizens collective, on December 11) termed the ministry’s press release “misleading”.There is “nothing new” in the communication, and the ministry has not given any directions under Section 5 of the Environment Protection Act, 1986 to this effect, the group said in a press release on December 24.The press note does not say that the ministry will not go by the new 100 metres-definition. It says that the MPSM will be placed in the public domain for “wide stakeholder consultation” but the Union environment minister has to answer as to why public consultation was not conducted for deciding on the new definition of the Aravallis, the group said.In reference to the press note saying that the ICFRE has been directed to identify additional areas where mining is to be prohibited based on ecological, geological and landscape consideration, the group said: “We are surprised that social and livelihood factors have not been considered.”