'Sena ruling absolutely well-reasoned, justified'

A day after his verdict opened a new chapter in the Sena vs Sena tussle, Maharashtra assembly speaker Rahul Narwekar, in an interview with Surendra P Gangan and Shailesh Gaikwad, explains the rationale behind his decision in a batch of petitions filed by the two camps of Shiv Sena, seeking disqualification of rival camp's legislators. Edited excerpts:

Sena (UBT) leaders said they will challenge the verdict in the Supreme Court.

My job was to give the verdict in accordance with the Constitution of the country. Any citizen can approach the SC or high court if they feel their fundamental rights have been infringed upon. The order I gave is absolutely tenable in law, wellreasoned and justified.

Opposition parties, including the one led by Uddhav Thackeray, have alleged the verdict was prepared in Delhi. They also accuse you of advocating the interest of Eknath Shinde's faction.

These allegations have been made for the last one year, ever since I started adjudicating this issue, perhaps with the intention to put pressure on my decisionmaking process. Rather than making baseless allegations, they should analyse the decision, understand it and point out the lacunae in the order.

Have you addressed the directives given by SC?

All of them. The SC had said: first decide which is the original party, then decide what is its desire and based on that, appoint the whip. Also, while deciding the political party, look at the constitution, organisational structure and legislative strength of the group. In case of dispute regarding the party's constitution, refer to the one given to the ECI prior to the dispute. With such clear criteria, where was the scope for me to go beyond?