Earlier quoted context omitted.
The poster thinks the tech lead is in idiot partly based on the fact the tech lead doesn't close as many tickets as juniors. Any good interviewer will figure this out if it's mentioned. Then they will know the poster doesn't know as much as they think they do about the job of a tech lead, and that they jump to damning conclusions from dubious judgement. This correlates with "this person may be challenging to work wit…
You are yourself jumping to damning conclusions about the OP, a person you don't know anything about except for what is written in his or her question. It is entirely possible that the OP is right and that the tech lead is an idiot. That is a valid reason for wanting to switch jobs.
I've avoided saying anything about whether the OP is right about whether their tech lead is an idiot.
The only conclusion about the OP I see is "The poster thinks the tech lead is in idiot partly based on the fact the tech lead doesn't close as many tickets as juniors."
I think that's a simple implication from the OP writing "he is not very productive — our junior engineers are lapping him on tickets closed".
All the rest of my comment is about how an interviewer might likely think if that were said in the manner discussed; it's not about the OP.