Vadodara: A day after the Gujarat high court (HC) came down heavily on the state govt for failing to conduct elections to the board of Baroda Dairy, the Vadodara district administration issued the notification for the election.According to the notification issued on Friday, the election for the board of the Baroda District Cooperative Milk Producers Union Limited (Baroda Dairy) will be held on March 18.The notification states that nominations can be filed for the 13 seats on the dairy’s board from Feb 21 to 26. Candidates can withdraw nominations between March 3 and 7, while scrutiny of nomination forms will be held on March 7. Counting of the votes will be on March 18, soon after the voting ends.The Baroda Dairy election was delayed as the term of the incumbent board had ended.A division bench of Justice Bhargav Karia and Justice L S Piyushzada of the Gujarat high court, while hearing a contempt petition, pulled up senior officials for disregarding earlier orders mandating that cooperative society elections be held at least 90 days before the expiry of the board’s term.The court summoned the state cooperative secretary, registrar of cooperative societies Mitesh Pandya, Vadodara district collector Anil Dhameliya, assistant collector Aishwarya Dubey and district cooperative registrar Neelam Chavda. All of them were directed to appear before the bench on Friday, in person or through video conferencing.The state govt recently issued a notification extending the terms of the management committees of all cooperative societies by six months. The bench questioned the legality of the Jan 28 notification, observing that administrative orders cannot override specific judicial directions.The court also rejected the govt’s claim that officials were tied up with Special Intensive Revision duties, pointing out that cooperative elections involve a limited voter base and cannot be compared to assembly or Lok Sabha elections.The bench further noted that the authorities failed to publish the preliminary voter list for Baroda Dairy.The court said once a board’s term expires, the law requires fresh elections or the appointment of an administrator. The failure to ensure a timely electoral process amounted to a direct violation of the single judge’s earlier order.
