You are on page 1of 2

Pamantasan ng Lungsod ng Maynila vs IAC


Dr. Hernani Esteban was extended an ad interim temporary appointment as Vice-President of

Administration at the Pamantasan ng Lungsod ng Maynila on May 20, 1973. His appointment
was effective from May 21, 1973 to June 30, 1974 unless sooner terminated. He continued
receiving reappointments in the years thereafter.
Esteban discovered on July 26, 1975 that he was not included in the list of employees
recommended for permanent appointments. He wrote to Dr. Consuelo Blanco requesting
conversion of his temporary appointment to a permanent one, considering his 2 years of
service. His request was denied for reasons not stated in the case.
On Aug. 7, 1975, Dr. Blanco issued a memorandum circular terminating Estebans appointment as
Vice-President effective July 31, 1975. His appointment dated June 26, 1975 until June 30, 1976
was withdrawn before it could be confirmed by the Pamantasan Board of Regents.
Esteban appealed to the Civil Service Commission, but the CSC initially denied it on the grounds
that Estebans appointment was merely temporary and could have been terminated at any time
with or without request that it be converted into a permanent appointment, and such an
appointment is left to the discretion of the appointing official.
However, Esteban filed a motion of reconsideration of the ruling, upon which the CSC ruled
favourably, deeming Esteban certified for permanent appointment in light of his qualifications.
The Pamantasan then appealed the ruling. The CSC then said that its certification of Esteban
should not be interpreted as directing his reinstatement.
On July 6, 1977, the CSC modified its earlier ruling, stating that Dr. Blanco had no authority to
extend Dr. Esteban an ad interim appointment as Vice President for Administration; only the
Board of Regents was empowered to do that under Art. 55 of the Pamantasan University Charter.
However, as a de facto officer, Esteban was entitled to be paid the salary of the position.
PD 1409 was issued on June 6, 1978, creating a Merits System Board in the CSC to hear and
decide cases brought before it on appeal by officers and employees who feel aggrieved by the
determination of officials on personnel matters. The Board instructed the Pamantasan to submit
its complete records on Estebans appointments. The Pamantasans record officer did not submit
a copy of the Board of Regents 1973 resolution confirming Estebans ad interim appointment,
among others.
The Board directed the Pamantasan to submit any document actually showing that Esteban was
appointed in a permanent capacity, but the Pamantasan responded that they could not find any
such document, despite the existence of the Boards 1973 resolution. In view of this failure to
produce this resolution, the Merits System Board concluded that there was truth to Estebans
claims that he was appointed in a permanent capacity. It also presumed that the Pamantasan was
withholding the evidence for some sinister motive. The CSC ruled that Estebans appointment
was permanent, and the temporary appointments did not alter this status as it was a vested right.
It ultimately held that his termination was illegal.
The Pamantasan filed a motion for reconsideration of that ruling, but was denied. They then filed
a petition for certiorari with the CFI of Manila. The trial court reversed the CSCs decision and
adopted the earlier decision stating that Estebans appointment was invalid as Dr. Blanco did not
have the authority, but he was still entitled to payment of his salary.
Esteban appealed to the IAC, and it reversed the trial courts decision, declaring Estebans
appointment as permanent.


WON Estebans appointment was really of a permanent nature


Estebans appointment is permanent.

In the context of Philippine law, the term ad interim does not mean the appointment is
temporary; rather, it means that the appointment is made by an official not
usually tasked to make appointments. In this case, Estebans appointment was
made by the Pamantasans President while its Board of Regents, the body with the
authority to make appointments, is unable to act (i.e. while it is not in session).
The insistence of the Pamantasan that all the other reappointments made Estebans term
temporary in nature and easily terminable ignores the original resolution of the Board of
Regents, which made his appointment permanent when they confirmed his ad interim
And since Estebans appointment was permanent, he had acquired the right to security of
tenure. He is entitled to full pay, allowances, and other benefits acquired during the
period he was working.