New Delhi: A group of environmentalists, social activists and others on Tuesday questioned the composition of a high-powered expert committee constituted by the Supreme Court two weeks ago to review the Centre’s report on the definition and delineation of the Aravalli hill range.

In an open letter addressed to Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant, the group — Aravalli Virasat Jan Abhiyaan — said the new committee is neither high-powered nor impartial.

The committee, appointed by the apex court on June 3 and headed by Kanchan Devi, Director General of the Indian Council of Forestry Research and Education, has been directed to submit a comprehensive report by August 31.

Other members of the panel are Dr Subhash Ashutosh, former director general of the Forest Survey of India; Dr Rajendra Kumar Sharma, former director of the Geological Survey of India; Brij Mohan Singh Rathore, former joint secretary in the Environment Ministry; and Professor Ashok K Bhatnagar, former head of the Department of Botany at Delhi University.

The court also appointed Professor Jagdish Krishnaswamy of the Indian Institute for Human Settlements, Bengaluru, and Professor Laxmikant Sharma of the Central University of Haryana as special invitees whom the chairperson may associate with the committee’s work as required.

The Environment Ministry was directed to nominate an officer of the rank of director to serve as the panel’s member secretary.

Tuesday’s letter to CJI said that, given that the head of the committee reports directly to the Environment Ministry’s secretary and minister, it does not satisfy the criteria of either “impartiality” or “independence” as stated in the Supreme Court’s suo moto order issued in December 2025.

It was this order that had first mentioned the constitution of the high-powered expert panel to review the October 2025 report prepared by a committee led by the Environment Ministry’s secretary.

The letter highlighted that the new committee’s head and member secretary are lower in rank, status and power, compared to those who were part of the Environment Ministry’s committee whose report is set to be re-examined.

“It is a settled position of law and common sense that the body reviewing any previous decision must be of higher rank and expertise than the earlier body,” said the letter.

Additionally, it noted that the new committee’s chairperson and members should not be confined to a majority of serving or retired officials.

The committee “must be headed by and composed of specialists who are environmentalists, ecologists, scientists, hydrologists, public health and livelihood experts. The domain experts have to be an integral part of the new committee so that the report is comprehensive and presents the true costs of mining and other related activities,” said the letter.

Speaking at a press conference held to release the open letter, Sadhna Meena, a Bhil Adivasi leader from South Rajasthan, said it will take a long time for the new committee to meaningfully engage with mining-affected communities in every Aravalli district and examine the ground reality.

“The committee would certainly not be able to submit a comprehensive report by August 31. The date of submission of the report by the new committee must be extended,” she added.