Bengaluru is facing a situation reminiscent of the Aravalli controversy, as a Supreme Court-appointed panel is set to visit Bannerghatta National Park (BNP) on Friday, January 3, 2026. This visit follows a plea against a 2018 government decision to reduce the eco-sensitive zone (ESZ) around the park.
The heart of the issue lies in the government's move to significantly shrink the ESZ from 268.9 square kilometers to 168.8 square kilometers and decrease its width from 4 kilometers to just 1 kilometer. A group of concerned citizens and activists, led by K Belliappa, approached the Supreme Court in May 2025, arguing that this reduction undermines the very purpose of an ESZ. They allege that the decision was influenced by real estate developers and mining interests. The petitioners contend that several ecologically sensitive areas, including well-documented elephant corridors, were excluded from the final notification.
Kiran Urs, a member of the Bannerghatta Nature Conservation Trust (BNCT), suggests the ESZ reduction is an attempt to legitimize existing ecological violations. Urs claims that the excluded pockets contain active quarries and plans for a township, which would inevitably put immense pressure on the ecosystem.
The Supreme Court-appointed Central Empowered Committee (CEC), led by Chandra Prakash Goyal, will survey the park and engage with senior Karnataka officials, including the chief secretary, to assess the ecological impact of the ESZ reduction.
This situation mirrors the Aravalli controversy, where the Supreme Court has been grappling with the definition and protection of the Aravalli hills. In December 2025, the Supreme Court addressed the ongoing Aravalli controversy, which involved protests related to a new definition based on a 100-meter height rule for identifying hills. Environmental groups, like the Aravalli Virasat Jan Abhiyaan, expressed concerns that the new standard could lead to extensive mining across Rajasthan, Haryana, and Gujarat, endangering the fragile ecosystem, water resources, and climate for millions of people.
The Supreme Court had previously accepted a uniform definition of the Aravalli hills and ranges and prohibited new mining licenses in the area. However, due to ambiguities and concerns, the court stayed its earlier order and decided to form a high-power expert committee to conduct a thorough investigation. The court has kept in abeyance the directions in its November 20 verdict that had accepted a uniform definition of the Aravalli hills and ranges. A vacation bench made up of Chief Justice Surya Kant, Justices J K Maheshwari, and Augustine George Masih recommended setting up a high-power committee of subject-matter experts to conduct a thorough investigation into the matter.
The situation in Bengaluru highlights the ongoing challenges of balancing development with environmental protection, particularly in areas with significant ecological value. The Supreme Court's involvement in both the Aravalli and Bannerghatta cases underscores the importance of judicial oversight in safeguarding natural resources and ensuring sustainable development practices.
