Supreme Court dismisses pleas against HC order on scrutiny of milk societies before Gokul managing panel polls

Kolhapur: The Supreme Court on Wednesday dismissed a bunch of SLPs against the April 30 order of Bombay high court's Kolhapur bench, giving 80 days to the state department of co-operation to conduct scrutiny of primary milk societies facing liquidation notice and thereafter hold elections to the new managing committee of the Kolhapur Zilla Sahakari Dudh Utpadak Sangh Limited, popular as Gokul dairy."Having considered the matter in detail, we see no reason whatsoever to entertain the Special Leave Petitions (SLPs)," the Supreme Court bench of Justice P S Narasimha and Justice Alok Aradhe said.The bench noted that the petitioners neither challenged the state govt's order of May 4, appointing a committee of administrators to manage Gokul's day-to-day affairs nor challenged the amendment to the Maharashtra State Cooperatives Act Sub-Clause 3 of Section 73AAA that enabled appointment of such panel of administrators (after the lapse of the management committee's term) before the high court or before the apex court."In this view of the matter, we are not examining the grounds raised by Mukul Rohatgi and Abhishek Manu Singhvi, learned senior counsels appearing for the petitioners," the bench said.The SC took note of Maharashtra counsel Siddharth Dharmadhikari's submission that the State Co-operative Election Authority would endeavor to hold the elections as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of 90 days.The Gokul dairy — the largest milk cooperative in Maharashtra — primarily supplies milk to Pune, Mumbai and other cities. It has an annual turnover of Rs3,990 crore. Every five years, the election to the managing committee is held. The last such election was held in 2021 and the tenure of the managing committee ended on May 4, following which the state passed the order appointing the committee of administrators.The former directors who filed the SLPs claimed that the govt, through the amendment to the act, had imposed the administrator rule. They said it had taken away their democratic right to govern in continuity before the new directors were elected.