Patna High Court has called Bihar Deputy Chief Minister Tejashwi Prasad Yadav a “greenhorn” for his decision to transfer an engineer of the state Building Construction Department on the recommendations of an MLA and restored the official to his original place of posting.
The court also advised Yadav, son of RJD chief Lalu Prasad, to gather knowledge of law and “not get influenced and persuaded” by others. Yadav is the Building Construction minister.
Watch what else is making news
Hearing a petition by Arvind Kumar Singh, an assistant engineer with the department and a resident of Patna, a bench of Justice Ajay Kumar Tripathi on Wednesday quashed the transfer order. The court observed, “The Deputy Chief Minister…may be a greenhorn with regard to his present responsibility but since he is holding a post of high responsibility, he is supposed to know the law as well as abide by the law….
“(He should) not get influenced and persuaded by a letter written by an MLA who has nothing to do even with regard to place of posting of the petitioner since he does not belong to the constituency.”
Without identifying the MLA who wrote the letter to Yadav, the court order read, “The petitioner would be restored back to his original place of posting.”
The petitioner, Arvind Kumar Singh, was transferred on July 2 this year from the building division of Patna Medical College and Hospital to another office in the state capital. He had earlier been transferred from Kishanganj district to Patna last year. The normal duration of a posting is three years.
The court observed that Singh was transferred for “extraneous reasons” based on “maybe political consideration”.
The petitioner’s lawyer, Tej Bahadur Singh, said, “There was a clear motive to favour another engineer who was transferred from Gopalganj to Patna to replace my client. We protested favouritism.”
RJD national spokesperson Manoj Jha said, “Our government is committed to following the established procedures and decisions are influenced by none but the greatest good of people.” He did not comment on the court’s observations.