The way Y S Jagan Mohan Reddy handled the L V Subramaniam episode shows that the new Chief Minister still has a long way to go in acquiring the skills necessary to deal with bureaucrats.
Why was Subramaniam transferred to an insignificant post?
Apparently, in a recent meeting chaired by YS Jagan, the issue of acquiring land for dumping waste in all regions came up.
Subramaniam reportedly instructed the officials and IAS officers that they should acquire lands for dumping waste immediately because the government was planning to distribute land to the poor and because of this largesse, land might not be available.
To this, Jagan had remarked with a smile, “Whatever Subramaniam anna might feel, please remember that your priority is the distribution of land to the poor.”
Everyone laughed to defuse the awkwardness of the situation, but the damage had been done.
Naturally, passing judgement on government policy was a ‘slip of tongue’ by Subramaniam as it amounted to belittling the CM.
Added to this was the internal squabbles between Subramaniam and Praveen Prakash.
Reportedly, there was no clear demarcation of their authority with protocol favoring Subramaniam whereas Jagan was said to be impressed with Prakash for pushing through as many GOs as possible.
Nevertheless, when Subramaniam issued a show-cause notice to Praveen Prakash, alleging misconduct and violation of rules, none expected that three days later, Praveen Prakash would order the transfer of Subramaniam.
This was clearly done with the blessings of Jagan, a sort of vengeance at getting back at the man who had issued him a notice. This is where Jagan failed to act with tact.
Instead of dismissing Subramaniam as Chief Secretary, Jagan could have called in both Subramaniam and Prakash, sorted out their differences and demarcated a clear line of functions, actions and hierarchy for them.
Similarly, he could have excused Subramaniam’s ‘slip of tongue’ by reprimanding him severely in person. Instead, what he resorted to was not a sacking of Subramaniam but a humiliation of the latter.
Subramaniam has always been a ‘loyalist’ and besides, bureaucrats who supported Jagan have always found themselves in trouble in the past whether it be Subramaniam, Srilakshmi or someone else.
Now, when the turbulent times are over, if he cannot tolerate or excuse a single lapse on their part, it is unfair to their unstinted loyalty.
Besides, dismissing officers like Subramaniam in such a fashion will make other officers insecure as well.
Also, Subramaniam has less than a year for retirement and he could have been allowed to retire gracefully. Instead, removing him within only four months of the government’s formation reflects poorly on Jagan.
Maybe, worried over the negative fallout of Subramaniam’s ouster with the Brahmin community, a GO was passed appointing Ramana Deekshithulu as advisor in TTD. The merits or demerits of Ramana Deekshithulu are best left to the Lord Venkateswara himself.
Chandrababu had dealt harshly with the likes of IY Krishna Rao and Ajay Kallem and others and paid a huge price for it.
The problem with Jagan is that he is expecting the bureaucracy to adopt to his style whereas it is usually the other way round.
Bureaucrats spend their entire lives designing government mechanisms and they see umpteen Chief Ministers come and go. One cannot handle them the way one runs a political party or a faction.
The Chief Minister by virtue of his age can be quite hot-blooded at times. But he will surely learn and has to because the consequences can be quite pernicious.
He has come to power with a mammoth mandate and the expectations from him are sky-high. It is so easy to crumble under the weight of these expectations and make mistakes.
But because of those very expectations, even a small mistake will be viewed with a magnifying glass. And that is Jagan Mohan Reddy’s biggest problem.
