The consolidation of the Agris, Navi Mumbai's dominant community, under the Agri Sena was successfully prevented by Thackeray's outfit in the 1970s by providing a boost to the leadership of Naik, himself an Agri. If Naik now exploits local Agri emotions, which run deep, following his ouster from the state Cabinet, he could reap a rich political harvest at the expense of the Sena. Already rallying around him are Sainiks distressed with the overweening influence and interference of `The Family' and its power centres. As the struggle for supremacy within the party intensifies, the Sena finds itself fragmented and consumed by internecine conflicts.

Bolstered by Naik's success in giving the shock treatment tothe party bosses, more disillusioned Sena leaders could soon muster enough courage to speak up against the perceived injustice. And the steady simmer could soon reach full boil. Somewhere in all this is a pattern that is being studiously overlooked by Thackeray: From the revolt of Chhagan Bhujbal to his periodic differences with Manohar Joshi and now to the rebellion of Naik, the Sena boss has always found it difficult to come to terms with his partymen who over the natural course of time emerge as powerful leaders in their own right.

It's a classic struggle between monolithic authoritarianism and decentralisation. Regional satraps are a natural component of political life and it is time the Sena and more so Thackeray himself sorted out how to deal with them. Or else, given his advancing years and the fragmented support to the sundry members of his family, the luxury of choice could soon cease. Perhaps temporary sanyas is as good a time as any to ponder over these matters.