Coming down heavily on the Punjab Government over the handling of the Siswan forest area issue in a non-serious manner, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has warned that coercive steps may be taken against the Punjab Chief Secretary if directions regarding compliance with earlier court orders and filing of affidavits are not carried out.Taking up a bunch of petitions concerning the delisting and protection of forest land in the Siswan area of Mohali district, a Division Bench made it clear that the repeated affidavits filed by authorities reflected a disturbing lack of seriousness towards forest protection.“The number of affidavits that have been filed by GMADA and Forest Department on repeated occasions gives the impression that neither GMADA nor the State of Punjab is interested in protecting the forest area,” the Bench observed.The court directed the Punjab Chief Secretary to file a detailed affidavit responding to the issues earlier flagged by the Bench, particularly whether the conditions imposed by the Union Government while de-listing large tracts of land had been complied with.The Bench specifically sought clarification on whether the conditions attached to Government of India notifications dated March 16, 2006, and July 24, 2009, through which 65,670.26 hectares and 55,339.95 hectares of land, respectively, were de-listed or de-notified, had been fulfilled by the state authorities.Making its displeasure clear, the court ordered the state functionaries to comply with the directions, cautioning that failure would invite strict action.“The functionaries of the State of Punjab are directed to comply with this order, failing which coercive steps will be taken against the Chief Secretary, Punjab,” the Bench asserted.The state was also directed to ensure the filing of the required affidavit in a connected petition pending before the court.The matter will now come up for hearing on March 18.The Bench dealing with the matter comprised Chief Justice Sheel Nagu and Justice Sanjiv Berry. The Bench was assisted in the matter, among others, by senior advocate, Anand Chhibbar, D.S. Patwalia and counsel Gauravjit S. Patwalia.Earlier directionsThe latest order follows a series of directions issued by the High Court in November last year while examining allegations regarding non-forest activities and constructions in the Siswan area.The Bench had then directed Punjab authorities to place complete details of all non-forest and non-agricultural activities in Siswan village of Mohali district on record. The court had asked the Chief Administrator of the Greater Mohali Area Development Authority (GMADA) to file an affidavit specifying the total number of such activities.At the outset, the Bench had taken note of the fact that 169.22 hectares of land, including areas under cultivation and habitation, had been delisted from the purview of the Punjab Land Preservation Act (PLPA).Noting that the notification regarding the delisting did not clarify several aspects, the court had directed the state to file an additional affidavit and place on record the entire minutes of the April 26, 2010, meeting held under the chairmanship of the Punjab Chief Secretary, which governed the administration of the delisted areas.The Divisional Forest Officer of Mohali was also directed to file an affidavit stating the exact number of constructions raised in violation of the notification and the total number of non-forest and non-agricultural activities being carried out in Siswan.The Bench had clarified that its concern was limited to determining whether forest land, reserved forest area, sanctuary or national park meant exclusively for forest activity was being encroached upon by constructions.One of the petitions before the court was filed by a firm running a restaurant near Siswan Dam. Appearing for the petitioner, senior advocate Anand Chhibbar had contended that the establishment stood on land classified as “Gair Mumkin Abadi” and had remained in the possession of a director’s family for more than three decades.The petition challenged a show-cause notice issued by the GMADA alleging unauthorised construction on agricultural land and purported violations of the Punjab New Capital (Periphery) Control Act, 1952, and the Punjab Regional and Town Planning and Development Act, 1995.The petitioner had argued that the notice ordered cessation of operations and demolition within 30 days without granting a proper opportunity of hearing, which it described as contrary to the principles of natural justice.