DistantNews
Support us
๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ณ India /Crime & Justice

Supreme Court refuses deadline extension for Aravalli panel submissions

From Hindustan Times · () English

Translated from English, summarized and contextualized by DistantNews.

At a glance

News Named sources Context piece
  • The Supreme Court refused to extend the deadline for submissions to the committee defining the Aravalli hills, citing concerns about misuse by vested interests.
  • The high-powered committee is tasked with conserving the Aravalli ecosystem across Gujarat, Haryana, Rajasthan, and Delhi and must submit its report by August 31.
  • While the court will not grant a judicial extension, individuals can still submit suggestions directly to the committee, which will then decide whether to consider them.

The Supreme Court has rejected a request to extend the deadline for submitting representations to a high-powered committee tasked with defining the Aravalli hills. The court expressed concern that any judicial extension could be exploited by those with vested interests to delay the conservation process.

We will not extend time through a judicial order. We know people with vested interests having deep-rooted interests who will try to delay this process, if any extension is granted.

โ€” Chief Justice of India Surya KantThe Chief Justice explained the Supreme Court's refusal to grant a judicial extension for submissions to the Aravalli committee.

Chief Justice of India Surya Kant stated that the court would not issue a judicial order for an extension. "We know people with vested interests having deep-rooted interests who will try to delay this process, if any extension is granted," he remarked. The committee is mandated to submit its report, including recommendations for conserving the Aravalli ecosystem across Gujarat, Haryana, Rajasthan, and Delhi, by August 31.

Senior advocate Devashish Bharuka had sought an urgent listing, arguing that the August 11 deadline had passed and the committee would not accept submissions without court permission. He represented a non-profit organization working with tribal communities in Gujarat, many of whom are digitally illiterate and unaware of the committee's online notice. Bharuka also alleged that the committee had overlooked Gujarat and conducted site inspections only in Delhi, Haryana, and Rajasthan.

We do not want such piecemeal criticism of the committee. We will wait for the report. It is not that they have closed site visits.

โ€” Chief Justice of India Surya KantThe Chief Justice responded to criticisms regarding the committee's site inspections and process.

The Chief Justice dismissed these criticisms, stating the court would await the committee's report. "We do not want such piecemeal criticism of the committee. We will wait for the report. It is not that they have closed site visits," he said. The bench also deemed it "very difficult to believe that people did not know" about the widely publicized notice. However, they advised that suggestions could still be submitted directly to the committee, which would then decide on their consideration.

It is very difficult to believe that people did not know. However, you can submit your suggestions. If they do not take it, come to us. This is not like any limitation period that they will not consider beyond a date.

โ€” The benchThe Supreme Court bench addressed the claim that stakeholders were unaware of the committee's notice and advised on submitting suggestions.
DistantNews Editorial

Originally published by Hindustan Times in English. Translated, summarized, and contextualized by our editorial team with added local perspective. Read our editorial standards.