You are on page 1of 22

MECANO VS COA

Eventually, petitioner’s claim was returned by


FACTS: Undersecretary of Justice Montenegro to Director Lim
with the advice that petitioner “elevate the matter to
Mecano is a Director II of the NBI. He was the Supreme Court if he so desires”.
hospitalized and on account of which he incurred
medical and hospitalization expenses, the total amount Hence this petition for certiorari.
of which he is claiming from the COA.
ISSUE:
He requested reimbursement for his expenses on the WON the Administrative Code of 1987 repealed or
ground that he is entitled to the benefits under Section abrogated Section 699 of the RAC
699 of the RAC (Revised Administrative Code), the
pertinent provisions of which read: HELD:
No. The Court resolves to GRANT the petition;
Sec. 699. Allowances in case of injury, death, or sickness respondent is hereby ordered to give due course to
incurred in performance of duty. —the proper Head of petitioner’s claim for benefits.
Department may direct that absence during any period
of disability thereby occasioned shall be on full pay, The question of whether a particular law has been
though not more than six months. He may in his repealed or not by a subsequent law is a matter of
discretion also authorize the payment of the medical legislative intent. The lawmakers may expressly repeal a
attendance, necessary transportation, subsistence and law by incorporating therein a repealing provision which
hospital fees of the injured person. Absence in the case expressly and specifically cites the particular law or laws,
contemplated shall be charged first against vacation and portions thereof, that are intended to be repealed.
leave, if any there be. A declaration in a statute, usually in its repealing clause,
that a particular and specific law, identified by its
In case of sickness caused by or connected directly with number or title, is repealed is an express repeal; all
the performance of some act in the line of duty, the others are implied repeals
Department head may in his discretion authorize the
payment of the necessary hospital fees. In the case of the two Administrative Codes in question,
Director Lim then forwarded petitioner’s claim, to the the ascertainment of whether or not it was the intent of
Secretary of Justice who favorably recommended the the legislature to supplant the old Code with the new
payment of petitioner’s claim. Code partly depends on the scrutiny of the repealing
clause of the new Code. This provision is found in
However, then Undersecretary of Justice, Bello III, Section 27, Book VII (Final Provisions) of the
returned petitioner’s claim to Director Lim, having Administrative Code of 1987 which reads:
considered the statements of the Chairman of the COA
to the effect that the RAC being relied upon was Sec. 27. Repealing Clause. — All laws, decrees,
repealed by the Administrative Code of 1987. orders, rules and regulations, or portions thereof,
inconsistent with this Code are hereby repealed or
Petitioner then re-submitted his claim with a copy of modified accordingly.
Opinion No. 73, S. 1991 of then Secretary of Justice Comparing the two Codes, it is apparent that the new
stating that “the issuance of the Administrative Code did Code does not cover nor attempt to cover the entire
not operate to repeal or abregate in its entirety the subject matter of the old Code. There are several
Revised Administrative Code, including the particular matters treated in the old Code which are not found in
Section 699 of the latter”. the new Code.
Director Lim transmitted anew Mecano’s claim to then Moreover, the COA failed to demonstrate that the
Undersecretary Bello for favorable consideration; provisions of the two Codes on the matter of the subject
Secretary Drilon forwarded petitioner’s claim to the COA claim are in an irreconcilable conflict. In fact, there can
Chairman, recommending payment of the same. COA be no such conflict because the provision on sickness
Chairman however, denied petitioner’s claim on the benefits of the nature being claimed by petitioner has
ground that Section 699 of the RAC had been repealed not been restated in the Administrative Code of 1987.
by the Administrative Code of 1987, solely for the reason Lastly, it is a well-settled rule of statutory construction
that the same section was not restated nor re-enacted in that repeals of statutes by implication are not favored.
the Administrative Code of 1987. He commented, The presumption is against inconsistency and
however, that the claim may be filed with the repugnancy for the legislature is presumed to know the
Employees’ Compensation Commission, considering that existing laws on the subject and not to have enacted
the illness of Director Mecano occurred after the inconsistent or conflicting statutes.
effectivity of the Administrative Code of 1987.
1
Administrative Law Case Digests
LEVERIZA VS IAC Sec. 567 of the Revised Administrative Code. Said
motion was however denied.
FACTS: On appeal, the IAC affirmed in toto the decision of the
Around three contracts of lease resolve the basic issues lower court. Hence this petition for Review on certiorari.
in the instant case:
Contract A — a lease contract of April 2, 1965 between ISSUE:
the Republic of the Philippines, represented by Civil Whether or not said Contract A is still subsisting after its
Aeronautics Administration (CAA) and Leveriza over a cancellation by CAA on the ground of a sublease
parcel of land containing an area of 4,502 square meters, executed by petitioners with Mobil Oil (CONTRACT B)
for 25 years. without the consent of CAA and the execution of
Contract B — a lease contract (in effect a sublease) of another contract of lease between CAA and Mobil Oil
May 21, 1965 between Leveriza and Mobil Oil (CONTRACT C)
Philippines, Inc., over the same parcel of land, but The issue narrows down to: WON there is a valid ground
reduced to 3,000 square meters for 25 years; and for the cancellation of Contract A
Contract C — a lease contract of June 1, 1968 between
defendant CAA and plaintiff Mobil Oil over the same HELD:
parcel of land, but reduced to 3,000 square meters, for Yes. Contract A was entered into by CAA as the lessor
25 years. and the Leverizas as the lessee specifically “for the
The parties were aware that the subject matter of the purpose of operating and managing a gasoline station by
three contracts of lease is the same parcel of land, with the latter, to serve vehicles going in and out of the
the noted difference in area. However, it appears that airport.”
defendant CAA as LESSOR, leased the same parcel of As regards prior consent of the lessor to the transfer of
land, for durations of time that overlapped to two rights to the leased premises, the provision of paragraph
lessees, to wit: (1) Leveriza and Mobil Oil, and the latter, 7 of said Contract reads in full:
as LESSEE, leased the same parcel of land from two 7. The Party of the Second part may transfer her rights
lessors, to wit: (1) Leveriza and (2) CAA for durations of to the leased premises but in such eventuality, the
time that also overlapped. consent of the Party of the First Part shall first be
Mobil Oil seeks the rescission or cancellation of Contract secured. In any event, such transfer of rights shall have
A and B on the ground that Contract A from which to respect the terms and conditions of this agreement.
Contract B is derived and depends has already been Paragraph 8 provides the sanction for the violation of
cancelled by the defendant CAA and maintains that the above-mentioned terms and conditions of the
Contract C with the defendant CAA is the only valid and contract. Said paragraph reads:
subsisting contract insofar as the parcel of land, subject 8. Failure on the part of the Party of the Second Part to
to the present litigation is concerned. comply with the terms and conditions herein agreed
Defendants Leverizas’ claim that Contract A which is upon shall be sufficient for revocation of this contract by
their contract with CAA has never been legally cancelled the Party of the First Part without need of judicial
and still valid and subsisting; that it is Contract C which demand.
should be declared void. The cancellation of the contract was made in a letter by
CAA asserts that Contract A is still valid and subsisting Jurado, Airport General Manager of CAA addressed to
and asks the court to annul Contract A because of the Rosario Leveriza. Respondent Leverizas and the CAA
violation committed by Leveriza in leasing the parcel of assailed the validity of such cancellation, claiming that
land to plaintiff by virtue of Contract B without the the Airport General Manager had no legal authority to
consent of CAA. CAA further asserts that Contract C not make the cancellation. They maintain that it is only the
having been approved by the Director of Public Works (1)Secretary of Public Works and Communications,
and Communications is not valid. acting for the President, or by delegation of power, the
After trial, the lower courts rendered judgment: (2)Director of CCA who could validly cancel the contract.
1. Declaring Contract A as having been validly cancelled Petitioners argue that cancelling or setting aside a
on June 28, 1966, and has therefore ceased to have any contract approved by the Secretary is, in effect,
effect as of that date; repealing an act of the Secretary which is beyond the
2. Declaring that Contract B has likewise ceased to have authority of the Administrator.
any effect as of June 28, 1966 because of the Such argument is untenable. The terms and conditions
cancellation of Contract A; under which such revocation or cancellation may be
3. Declaring that Contract C was validly entered into on made, have already been specifically provided for in
June 1, 1968, and that it is still valid and subsisting; Contract “A” which has already been approved by the
CAA filed a Motion for Reconsideration, averring that Department Head, It is evident that in the
because the lot lease was properly registered in the implementation of aforesaid contract, the approval of
name of the Republic of the Philippines, it was only the said Department Head is no longer necessary if not
President of the Philippines or an officer duly designated redundant
by him who could execute the lease contract pursuant to
2
Administrative Law Case Digests
LUZON DEVELOPMENT BANK VS ASSO. OF LDB
EMPLOYEES IRON AND STEEL AUTHORITY VS COURT OF APPEALS

FACTS: FACTS:
From a submission agreement of the LDB and the Petitioner Iron and Steel Authority (ISA) was created by
Association of Luzon Development Bank Employees Presidential Decree No. 272 dated August 9, 1973 in
(ALDBE) arose an arbitration case to resolve the issue: order, to develop and promote the iron and steel
“Whether or not the company has violated the industry in the Philippines. P.D. No. 272 initially created
CBA provision and the MOA on promotion.” petitioner ISA for a term of 5 years, and when ISA’s
At a conference, the parties agreed on the submission of original term expired on October 10, 1978, its term was
their respective Position Papers. Atty. Garcia, in her extended for another 10 years.
capacity as Voluntary Arbitrator, received ALDBE’s The National Steel Corporation (NSC) then a wholly
Position Paper ; LDB, on the other hand, failed to submit owned subsidiary of the National Development
its Position Paper despite a letter from the Voluntary Corporation, which is itself an entity wholly owned by
Arbitrator reminding them to do so. As of May 23, 1995 the National Government, embarked on an expansion
no Position Paper had been filed by LDB. program embracing, among other things, the
Without LDB’s Position Paper, the Voluntary Arbitrator construction of an integrated steel mill in Iligan City.
rendered a decision finding the Bank has not adhered to Pursuant to the expansion program of the NSC,
the CBA provision nor the MOA on promotion. Proclamation No. 2239 was issued by the President of
Hence, this petition for certiorari and prohibition seeking the Philippines on November 16, 1982 withdrawing from
to set aside the decision of the Voluntary Arbitrator and sale or settlement a large tract of public land located in
to prohibit her from enforcing the same. Iligan City and reserving that land for the use and
immediate occupancy of NSCs.
ISSUE: Since certain portions of the public land subject matter
WON a voluntary arbiter’s decision is appealable to the of Proclamation No. 2239 were occupied by a non-
CA and not the SC. operational chemical fertilizer plant owned by private
respondent Maria Cristina Fertilizer Corporation (MCFC),
HELD: LOI No. 1277, also dated 16 November 1982, was issued
Yes. The Court resolved to REFER this case to the Court directing the NSC to “negotiate with the owners of
of Appeals. MCFC, for and on behalf of the Government, for the
The jurisdiction conferred by law on a voluntary compensation of MCFC’s present occupancy rights on
arbitrator or a panel of such arbitrators is quite limited the subject land.” LOI No. 1277 also directed that should
compared to the original jurisdiction of the labor arbiter NSC and private respondent MCFC fail to reach an
and the appellate jurisdiction of the NLRC for that agreement within a period of 60 days from the date of
matter. While there is an express mode of appeal from the LOI, petitioner ISA was to exercise its power of
the decision of a labor arbiter, Republic Act No. 6715 is eminent domain under P.D. No. 272 and to initiate
silent with respect to an appeal from the decision of a expropriation proceedings in respect of occupancy rights
voluntary arbitrator. of private respondent MCFC relating to the subject
Section 9 of B.P. Blg. 129, as amended by Republic Act public land as well as the plant itself and related facilities
No. 7902, provides that the Court of Appeals shall and to cede the same to the NSC.
exercise: Negotiations between NSC and private respondent
(B) Exclusive appellate jurisdiction over all final MCFC did fail.
judgments, decisions, resolutions, orders or awards of
RTC s and quasi-judicial agencies, instrumentalities, ISSUE:
boards or commissions… except those falling within the Whether or not the Republic of the Philippines is entitled
appellate jurisdiction of the Supreme Court in to be substituted for ISA in view of the expiration of ISA's
accordance with the Constitution, the Labor Code of the term.
Philippines under Presidential Decree No. 442, as
amended, the provisions of this Act, and of HELD:
subparagraph (1) of the third paragraph and Clearly, ISA was vested with some of the powers or
subparagraph (4) of the fourth paragraph of Section 17 attributes normally associated with juridical personality
of the Judiciary Act of 1948. but did not possess general or comprehensive juridical
Although voluntary arbitrator or the panel of voluntary personality separate and distinct from that of the
arbitrators may not strictly be considered as a quasi- Government. The ISA in fact appears to the Court to be a
judicial agency, board or commission, still both he and non-incorporated agency or instrumentality of the
the panel are comprehended within the concept of a Government of the Republic of the Philippines. ISA may
“quasi-judicial instrumentality.” thus be properly regarded as an agent or delegate of the
Republic of the Philippines.

3
Administrative Law Case Digests
When the statutory term of a non-incorporated agency Ombudsman against several officials of the Housing and
expires, the powers, duties and functions as well as the Land Use Regulatory Board (HLURB), Department of
assets and liabilities of that agency revert back to, and Environment and Natural Resources (DENR), and the
are re-assumed by, the Republic of the Philippines, in the local government of Antipolo.
absence of special provisions of law specifying some
other disposition thereof such as, e.g., devolution or The charge against petitioner involved a supposed
transmission of such powers, duties, functions, etc. to failure on her part to monitor and inspect the
some other identified successor agency or development of CHS, which was assumed to be her duty
instrumentality of the Republic of the Philippines. When as DENR senior environmental management specialist.
the expiring agency is an incorporated one, the
consequences of such expiry must be looked for in the The petitioner claimed that she monitored the
charter of that agency and, by way of supplementation, development of CHS as evidenced by 3 monitoring
in the provisions of the Corporation Code. Since, in the reports .She further claimed good faith and exercise of
instant case, ISA is a non-incorporated agency or due diligence, insisting that the tragedy was a fortuitous
instrumentality of the Republic, its powers, duties, event. She reasoned that the collapse did not occur in
functions, assets and liabilities are properly regarded as Cherry Hills, but in the adjacent mountain eastern side of
folded back into the Government of the Republic of the the subdivision.
Philippines and hence assumed once again by the
Republic, no special statutory provision having been The Office of the Ombudsman rendered a decision
shown to have mandated succession thereto by some imposing upon petitioner the supreme penalty of
other entity or agency of the Republic. dismissal from office for gross neglect of duty.

In the instant case, ISA instituted the expropriation Petitioner seasonably filed a petition for review of the
proceedings in its capacity as an agent or delegate or Ombudsman’s decision with the CA who dismissed the
representative of the Republic of the Philippines petition for lack of merit and affirmed the appealed
pursuant to its authority under P.D. No. 272. decision. Motion for reconsideration was also denied.
From the foregoing premises, it follows that the Republic This petition for review on certiorari
of the Philippines is entitled to be substituted in the
expropriation proceedings as party-plaintiff in lieu of ISA, ISSUE:
the statutory term of ISA having expired. Put a little WON Balicas is guilty of gross neglect of duty
differently, the expiration of ISA's statutory term did not
by itself require or justify the dismissal of the eminent HELD:
domain proceedings. No. The petition is hereby GRANTED, The CA decision is
REVERSED and SET ASIDE, and petitioners
BALICAS VS. FACT-FINDING AND INTELLIGENCE REINSTATEMENT to her position with back pay and
BUREAU, OFFICE OF THE OMBUDSMAN without loss of seniority rights is hereby ordered.

FACTS: In order to ascertain if there had been gross neglect of


In the development of the Cherry Hills Subdivision (CHS), duty, we have to look at the lawfully prescribed duties of
Philjas Corp. applied for the issuance of ECC from the petitioner. Unfortunately, DENR regulations are silent on
DENR-Region IV. the specific duties of a senior environmental
management specialist. Internal regulations merely
BALICAS, PENRO senior environmental management speak of the functions of the Provincial Environment and
specialist, monitored the implementation of the CHS Natural Resources Office (PENRO) to which petitioner
Project Development to check compliance with the directly reports.The monitoring duties of the PENRO
terms and conditions in the ECC. She conducted another mainly deal with broad environmental concerns,
monitoring on the project for the same purpose. In both particularly pollution abatement. This general
instances, she noted that the project was still in the monitoring duty is applicable to all types of physical
construction stage hence, compliance with the developments that may adversely impact on the
stipulated conditions could not be fully assessed, and environment.
therefore, a follow-up monitoring is proper. It appeared
from the records that this August 23, 1995 monitoring However, a more specific monitoring duty is imposed on
inspection was the last one conducted by the DENR. the HLURB as the sole regulatory body for housing and
land development.
Immediately after the tragic incident, landslide, on
August 3, 1999, a fact-finding investigation was P.D. No. 1586 prescribes the following duties on the
conducted by the Office of the Ombudsman through its HLURB (then Ministry of Human Settlements) in
Fact-Finding and Intelligence Bureau (FFIB), which duly connection with environmentally critical projects
filed an administrative complaint with the Office of the requiring an ECC:
4
Administrative Law Case Digests
On the same date, Judge Lebaquin issued a restraining
SECTION 4. Presidential Proclamation of Environmentally order prohibiting PBAC from conducting the bidding and
Critical Areas and Projects. The President of the award the project. The defendants filed a motion to lift
Philippines may, by proclamation declare certain the restraining order on the ground that the court is
projects, undertakings or areas in the country as prohibited from issuing such order, preliminary
environmentally critical. No person, partnership or injunction and preliminary mandatory injunction in
corporation shall undertake or operate any such government infrastructure project under Sec. 1 of P.D.
declared environmentally critical project or area without 1818. They also contended that the preliminary
first securing an Environmental Compliance Certificate injunction had become moot and academic as it was
issued by the President or his duly authorized served after the bidding had been awarded and closed.
representative. xxxx
The Ministry of Human Settlements [now HLURB] shall: On January 2, 1989, the trial court lifted the restraining
(a) prepare the proper land or water use pattern for said order and denied the petition for preliminary injunction.
critical project(s) or area(s); It declared that the building sought to be constructed at
(b) establish ambient environmental quality standards; the ISCOF was an infrastructure project of the
(c) develop a program of environmental enhancement or government falling within the coverage of the subject
protective measures against calamitous factors such as law.
earthquake, floods, water erosion and others; and
(d) perform such other functions as may be directed by ISSUE:
the President from time to time. Whether or not ISCOF is a government instrumentality
subject to the provisions of PD 1818?
The legal duty to monitor housing projects, against
calamities such as landslides due to continuous rain, is RULING:
clearly placed on the HLURB, not on the petitioner as The 1987 Administrative Code defines a government
PENRO senior environmental management specialist. instrumentality as follows:
Instrumentality refers to any agency of the
National Government, not integrated within the
MALAGA VS PENACHOS department framework, vested with special functions or
jurisdiction by law, endowed with some if not all
FACTS: corporate powers, administering special funds, and
The Iloilo State College of Fisheries (ISCOF) through its enjoying operational autonomy, usually through a
Pre-qualifications, Bids and Awards Committee (PBAC) charter. This term includes regulatory agencies,
caused the publication in the November 25, 26 and 28, chartered institutions, and government-owned or
1988 issues of an Invitation to Bid for the construction of controlled corporations. (Sec. 2 (5) Introductory
a Micro Laboratory Building. The notice announced that Provisions).
the last day for the submission of pre-qualification The same Code describes a chartered institution thus:
requirements was on December 2, 1988, and that the Chartered institution - refers to any agency organized or
bids would be received and opened on December 12, operating under a special charter, and vested by law
1988 at 3 o'clock in the afternoon. with functions relating to specific constitutional policies
or objectives. This term includes the state universities
Petitioners Malaga and Najarro, doing business under and colleges, and the monetary authority of the state.
the name of BE Construction and Best Built Construction, (Sec. 2 (12) Introductory Provisions).
respectively, submitted their pre-qualification It is clear from the above definitions that ISCOF is a
documents at two o'clock in the afternoon of December chartered institution and is therefore covered by P.D.
2, 1988. Petitioner Occeana submitted his own on 1818.
December 5, 1988. All three of them were not allowed There are also indications in its charter that ISCOF is a
to participate in the bidding as their documents were government instrumentality. First, it was created in
considered late. pursuance of the integrated fisheries development
policy of the State, a priority program of the
On December 12, 1988, the petitioners filed a complaint government. Second, the Treasurer of the Republic of
with the Iloilo RTC against the officers of PBAC for their the Philippines shall also be the ex-officio Treasurer of
refusal without just cause to accept them resulting to the state college with its accounts and expenses to be
their non-inclusion in the list of pre-qualified bidders. audited by the Commission on Audit or its duly
They sought to the resetting of the December 12, 1988 authorized representative. Third, heads of bureaus and
bidding and the acceptance of their documents. They offices of the National Government are authorized to
also asked that if the bidding had already been loan or transfer to it, such apparatus, equipment, or
conducted, the defendants be directed not to award the supplies and even the services of such employees as can
project pending resolution of their complaint. be spared without serious detriment to public service.
Lastly, an additional amount of P1.5M had been
5
Administrative Law Case Digests
appropriated out of the funds of the National Treasury those of the usual test of merit and fitness utilized for
and it was also decreed in its charter that the funds and the career service; and 2) tenure which is limited to a
maintenance of the state college would henceforth be period specified by law, or which is coterminous with
included in the General Appropriations Law. that of the appointing authority or subject to his
pleasure, or which is limited to the duration of a
PRECLARO VS SANDIGANBAYAN particular project for which purpose employment was
made.
FACTS: Section 9(4) of the same provides that Non-Career
Accused is a project manager/consultant of the Chemical Service shall include Contractual personnel or those
Mineral Division, Department of Science and employment in the government is in accordance with a
Technology, a component of the Industrial Development special contract to undertake a specific work or job,
Institute which is an agency of the DOST. requiring special or technical skills not available in the
employing agency, to be accomplished within a specific
He is to supervise the construction of the ITDI-CMD period, which in no case shall exceed one year, and
building, while the Jaime Sta. Maria Construction performs or accomplishes the specific work or job, under
undertook the construction. The structure is jointly his own responsibility with a minimum of direction and
funded by the Philippine and Japanese Governments. supervision from the hiring agency.

While the said construction has not yet been completed, Crisostomo vs. CA, 258 SCRA 134 (1996)
accused either directly requested and/or demanded for
himself the sum of P200,000.00, claimed as part of the FACTS:
expected profit of the contractor. Crisostomo was appointed the President of the
Philippine College of Commerce (PCC) by the President
Petitioner was charged for violation of the Anti-Graft of the Philippines. During his incumbency, two
and Corrupt Practices Act for committing said offense in administrative charges were filed against him for illegal
relation to the performance of his official duties. use of government vehicles, misappropriation of
Petitioner asserts in a petition for review that he is not a construction materials, oppression and harassment,
public officer because he was neither elected nor grave misconduct, nepotism and dishonesty before the
appointed to a public office, but merely a private Office of the President. Likewise, he was also charged
individual hired by the ITDI on contractual basis for a with violation of Anti-Grant and Corrupt Practices Act
particular project and for a specified period. Hence the with the Tanod bayan.
Sandiganbayan erred in taking cognizance of the case.
Section 2 (b) of RA 3019 defines a public officer to As such, he was preventively suspended and Dr. Mateo
“include elective and appointive officials and employees, was designated as the officer-in-charge in his place.
permanent or temporary, whether in the classified or Meanwhile, Pres. Marcos passed PD 1341 converting
unclassified or exemption service receiving PCC into PUP, defining its objectives, organizational
compensation, even nominal, from the government…” structure and functions and expanding its curricular
offerings. Mateo continued as the head of the new
ISSUE: University. Crisostomo was later acquitted and his
WON a private individual hired on a contractual basis by administrative charges were dismissed and his
the government is a public officer. reinstatement was ordered together with payment of his
salaries and other benefits during the period of
HELD: suspension. However, Dr. Gellor, the acting president of
Yes. The word “includes” used in defining a public officer PUP did not vacate his office. This led to a contempt
indicates that the definition is not restrictive. The terms citation against Dr. Gellor.
“classified, unclassified or exemption service” were the
old categories of position in the civil service which have CA rendered a decision setting aside orders and writ of
been reclassified into Career Service and Non-Career reinstatement issued by the trial court. The payment of
Service by PD 807 providing for the organization of the salaries and benefits after the conversion of the PCC to
Civil Service Commission by the Administrative Code of PUP was disallowed. Petitioner filed a petition arguing
1987. that PD No. 1341 did not abolish PCC for had the law
A private individual hired on a contractual basis as intended PCC to lose its existence, it would have
Project Manager for a government undertaking falls specified that the PCC was abolished and that if PUP was
under the non-career service category of the Civil intended to be a new institution, the law would have
Service and thus is a public officer as defined by Sec 2(b) said it was being created.
of RA 3019.
Under Book V, Title I, Subtitle A, Chapter 2, Sec 6(2) of ISSUE:
the Administrative Code of 1987, non-career service in Did PD 1314 abolish PCC?
particular is characterized by 1) entrance other than
6
Administrative Law Case Digests
HELD: While the board of directors of a local chapter can create
PD 1314 did not abolish, but only changed the PCC into additional positions to provide for the needs of the
what is now PUP. What took place was a change in the chapter, the board of directors of the National Liga must
academic status of the educational institution, not in its be deemed to have the power to create additional
corporate life. As a general rule, when the purpose of positions not only for its management but also for that
the lawmaking authority is to abolish the office and of all the chapters at the municipal, city, provincial and
create a new one, he says so. In the instant case, PD metropolitan political subdivision levels. Otherwise the
1314 merely states that PCC is converted into the National Liga would be no different from the local
PUP. Inaddition, the law does not state that the lands, chapters. The fact is that Sec. 493 grants the power to
buildings and equipment owned by the PCC were being create positions not only to the boards of the local
“transferred” to the PUP but only that they “stand transferred” to chapters but to the board of the Liga at the national
it. “Stand transferred” simply means, level as well.
for example, that lands transferred to the PCC were to Petition dismissed.
be understood as transferred to the PUP as the new
name of the institution. BIRAOGO VS PTC

G.R. No. 115844. August 15, 1997 FACTS:


E.O No. 1 establishing the Philippine Truth Commission
FACTS: (PTC) of 2010 was signed by President Aquino. The said
Viola, as a barangay chairman, filed a petition for PTC is a mere branch formed under the Office of the
prohibition challenging the validity of the Art III, Sec.1-2 President tasked to investigate reports of graft and
of the Revised Implementing Rules and Guidelines for corruption committed by third-level public officers and
the General Elections of the Liga ng mga Barangay employees, their co-principals, accomplices and
Officers insofar as they provide for the election of first, accessories during the previous administration and
second, and third vice presidents and for auditors for the submit their findings and recommendations to
National Liga ng mga Barangay and its chapters. the President, Congress and the Ombudsman. However,
PTC is not a quasi-judicial body, it cannot adjudicate,
He contended that the questioned positions are in arbitrate, resolve, settle or render awards in disputes
excess of those provided in the LGC Sec.493 which between parties. Its job is to investigate, collect and
mentions as elective positions only those of the asses evidences gathered and make recommendations.
president, vice president, and five members of the board It has subpoena powers but it has no power to cite
of directors in each chapter at the municipal, city, people in contempt or even arrest. It cannot determine
provincial, metropolitan political subdivision, and for such facts if probable cause exist as to warrant the
national levels and thus the implementing rules expand filing of an information in our courts of law.
the numbers in the LGC in violation of the principle that
implementing rules and regulations cannot add or Petitioners contends the Constitutionality of the E.O. on
detract from the provisions of the law they are designed the grounds that.
to implement.
It violates separation of powers as
it arrogates the power of Congress to create a public
ISSUE:
office and appropriate funds for its operation;
Whether or not the additional positions in question have
been created without authority of law. The delegated authority of the President to
structurally reorganize the Office of the President does
RULING: not include the power to create an entirely new office
No. The creation of additional positions is authorized by was inexistent like the Truth Commission;
Sec. 493 of the LGC which in fact requires – and not
merely authorizes – the board of directors to “create The E.O illegally amended the Constitution
such other positions as it may deem necessary for the when it made the Truth Commission and vesting it the
management of the chapter”. To begin with, the power duplicating and even exceeding those of the
creation of these positions was actually made in the Office of the Ombudsman and the DOJ.
Constitution and By-laws of the Liga ng mga barangay It violates the equal protection clause
which was adopted by the First Barangay National
Assembly. ISSUE:

There is no undue delegation of power by Congress in WHETHER OR NOT the said E.O is unconstitutional.
this case. SC decisions have upheld the validity of
reorganization statutes authorizing the President of the
Philippines to create, abolish, or merge offices in the
executive management.
7
Administrative Law Case Digests
RULING: opportunity to be informed on the
proposed plantilla positions with their equivalent
Yes, E.O No. 1 should be struck down as it is violative of qualification standards.
the equal protection clause. It does not apply equally to
all members of the same class such that the intent of The Commissioners issued the guidelines for the
singling out the "previous administration" as its sole selection and hiring of ERC employees. A portion of the
object makes the PTC an "adventure in partisan guidelines provide that the provisions of Republic Act
hostility." Thus, in order to be accorded with validity, the No. 6656 (An Act to Protect the Security of [Tenure of]
commission must also cover reports of graft and Civil Service Officers and Employees in the
corruption in virtually all administrations previous to Implementation of Government Reorganization) will not
that of former President Arroyo. directly apply to ERCs current efforts to establish a new
The Chief Executive’s power to create the Ad hoc organization. Civil Service laws, rules and regulations,
Investigating Committee cannot be doubted. Having however, will have suppletory application.
been constitutionally granted full control of the
Executive Department, to which respondents belong, the KERB sent a letter to the Commissioners stating their
President has the obligation to ensure that all executive objection to the Commissioners stand that Civil Service
officials and employees faithfully comply with the law. laws, rules and regulations have suppletory application
With AO 298 as mandate, the legality of the in the selection and placement of the ERC
investigation is sustained. Such validity is not affected by employees. KERB asserted that RA 9136 did not abolish
the fact that the investigating team and the PCAGC had the ERB or change the ERBs character as an economic
the same composition, or that the former used the regulator of the electric power industry. KERB insisted
offices and facilities of the latter in conducting the that RA 9136 merely changed the ERBs name to the ERC
inquiry. and expanded the ERBs functions and objectives.

Commissioner Barin replied that Civil Service application


form no. 212 and the ERC-prescribed application format
KAPISANAN NG MGA KAWANI NG ENERGY
are substantially the same. Furthermore, the creation of
REGULATORY BOARD vs COMMISSIONER FE B. BARIN
a placement/recruitment committee is no longer
FACTS: necessary because there is already a prescribed set of
guidelines for the recruitment of personnel. The ERC
RA 9136, popularly known as EPIRA (for Electric Power hired an independent consultant to administer the
Industry Reform Act of 2001), provides for the abolition necessary tests for the technical and managerial
of the ERB and the creation of the ERC. Section 38 of it levels. Finally, the ERC already posted
states that: the plantilla positions, which prescribe higher standards,
Creation of the Energy Regulatory Commission. There is as approved by the Department of Budget and
hereby created an independent, quasi-judicial regulatory Management. Commissioner Barin stated that positions
board to be named the Energy Regulatory Commission in the ERC do not need the prior approval of the CSC, as
(ERC). For this purpose, the existing Energy Regulatory the ERC is only required to submit the qualification
Board (ERB) created under Executive Order No. 172, as standards to the CSC.
amended, is hereby abolished.
KERB filed the present petition then later filed an Urgent
The Chairman and members of the Commission shall Ex Parte Motion to Enjoin Termination of Petitioner ERB
assume office at the beginning of their Employees. However, before the ERC
terms: Provided, That, if upon the effectivity of this Act, received KERBs pleadings, the Selection Committee
the Commission has not been constituted and the new already presented its list of proposed appointees to the
staffing pattern and plantilla positions have not been Commissioners.
approved and filled-up, the current Board and existing
personnel of ERB shall continue to hold office. In their Comment, the Commissioners describe the
status of the ERB employees appointment in the ERC as
follows:
At the time of the filing of this petition, the ERC was
composed of Commissioner Fe B. Barin and Deputy Issue:
Commissioners Alindada, Ibay, Butalid, and Colayco. The 1. Whether Section 38 of RA 9136 abolishing the ERB is
Commissioners assumed office on 15 August 2001. They constitutional; and
issued the proposed Table of Organization, Staffing
Pattern, and Salary Structure which the President of Held:
the Philippines .Meanwhile, KERB submitted to the
Commissioners its Resolution requesting for an All laws enjoy the presumption of constitutionality. To
justify the nullification of a law, there must be a clear
8
Administrative Law Case Digests
and unequivocal breach of the Constitution. KERB failed CHREA vs.CHR
to show any breach of the Constitution.
FACTS:
The power to create an office carries with it the power Congress passed RA 8522, otherwise known as the
to abolish. President Corazon C. Aquino, then exercising General Appropriations Act of 1998. It provided for
her legislative powers, created the ERB by issuing Special Provisions Applicable to All Constitutional Offices
Executive Order No. 172 on 8 May 1987. Enjoying Fiscal Autonomy. On the strength of these
special provisions, the CHR promulgated Resolution No.
The question of whether a law abolishes an office is a A98-047 adopting an upgrading and reclassification
question of legislative intent. There should not be any scheme among selected positions in the Commission.
controversy if there is an explicit declaration of abolition By virtue of Resolution No. A98-062, the CHR “collapsed”
in the law itself. Section 38 of RA 9136 explicitly the vacant positions in the body to provide additional
abolished the ERB. However, abolition of an office and source of funding for said staffing modification.
its related positions is different from removal of an
incumbent from his office.Abolition and removal are The CHR forwarded said staffing modification and
mutually exclusive concepts. From a legal standpoint, upgrading scheme to the DBM with a request for its
there is no occupant in an abolished office. Where there approval, but the then DBM secretary denied the
is no occupant, there is no tenure to speak of. Thus, request.
impairment of the constitutional guarantee of security of
tenure does not arise in the abolition of an office. On the In light of the DBM’s disapproval of the proposed
other hand, removal implies that the office and its personnel modification scheme, the CSC-National Capital
related positions subsist and that the occupants are Region Office, through a memorandum, recommended
merely separated from their positions.[8] to the CSC-Central Office that the subject appointments
be rejected owing to the DBM’s disapproval of the
A valid order of abolition must not only come from a plantilla reclassification.
legitimate body, it must also be made in good faith. An
abolition is made in good faith when it is not made for
political or personal reasons, or when it does not Meanwhile, the officers of petitioner CHR-employees
association (CHREA) in representation of the rank and
circumvent the constitutional security of tenure of civil
file employees of the CHR, requested the CSC-Central
service employees. Abolition of an office may be brought
Office to affirm the recommendation of the CSC-
about by reasons of economy, or to remove redundancy
Regional Office.
of functions, or a clear and explicit constitutional
mandate for such termination of employment. Where
one office is abolished and replaced with another office The CSC-Central Office denied CHREA’s request in a
vested with similar functions, the abolition is a legal Resolution and reversed the recommendation of the
nullity. When there is a void abolition, the incumbent is CSC-Regional Office that the upgrading scheme be
deemed to have never ceased holding office. censured. CHREA filed a motion for reconsideration, but
the CSC-Central Office denied the same.
KERB asserts that there was no valid abolition of the ERB
but there was merely a reorganization done in bad faith. CHREA elevated the matter to the CA,
which affirmed the pronouncement of the CSC-Central
After comparing the provisions providing for the powers Office and upheld the validity of the upgrading, retitling,
and functions of the ERB and the ERC to see whether and reclassification scheme in the CHR on the
they have substantially the same functions, it was found justification that such action is within the ambit of CHR’s
out that the ERC indeed assumed the functions of the fiscal autonomy.
ERB. However, the overlap in the functions of the ERB
and of the ERC does not mean that there is no valid ISSUE:
abolition of the ERB. The ERC has new and expanded Whether or not the CHR can validly implement an
functions which are intended to meet the specific needs upgrading, reclassification, creation, and collapsing of
of a deregulated power industry. Because of the plantilla positions in the Commission without the prior
expansion of the ERCs functions and concerns, there was approval of the Department of Budget and
a valid abolition of the ERB. Thus, there is no merit Management?
to KERB’s allegation that there is an impairment of the
security of tenure of the ERBs employees. HELD:
No. The CHR Resolutions, without the approval of the
DBM are disallowed.

9
Administrative Law Case Digests
1. RA 6758 or the Salary Standardization Law, provides SEC. 29. Other Bodies. – There shall be in accordance
that it is the DBM who shall establish and administer a with the Constitution, an Office of the Ombudsman, a
unified Compensation and Position Classification System. Commission on Human Rights, and independent central
This power to “administer” is not purely ministerial in monetary authority, and a national police commission.
character as erroneously held by the CA. The word to Likewise, as provided in the Constitution, Congress may
administer means to control or regulate in behalf of establish an independent economic and planning
others; to direct or superintend the execution, agency.
application or conduct of; and to manage or conduct
public affairs, as to administer the government of the
Nor is there any legal basis to support the contention
state.
that the CHR enjoys fiscal autonomy.

2. The regulatory power of the DBM on matters of


compensation is encrypted not only in law, but in Anak Mindanao Party-list group (AMIN) and Mamalo
jurisprudence as well. In the recent case of PRA v. Descendants Organization Inc. (MDOI) v Executive
Buñag, this Court ruled that compensation, allowances, Secretary
and other benefits received by PRA officials and
employees without the requisite approval or authority of Facts:
the DBM are unauthorized and irregular
Petitioners Anak Mindanao Party-List Group (AMIN)
and Mamalo Descendants Organization, Inc. (MDOI)
In Victorina Cruz v. CA , we held that the DBM has the
assail the constitutionality of Executive Order (E.O.) Nos.
sole power and discretion to administer the 364 and 379 (Transforming the DAR to Department of
compensation and position classification system of the
Land Reform), both issued in 2004, via the present
national government.
Petition for Certiorari and Prohibition with prayer for
injunctive relief.
In Intia, Jr. v. COA the Court held that although the
charter of the PPC grants it the power to fix the EO. 364, as amended by EO. 379, among other things,
compensation and benefits of its employees, the orders that the Presidential Commission for the Urban
compensation system established by the PPC is, Poor (PCUP) placed under the supervision and control of
nonetheless, subject to the review of the DBM. the Department of Land Reform, and the National
Commission on Indigenous Peoples (NCIP)shall be an
attached agency of the Department of Land Reform.
3. As such, the approval of DBM must first be sought
prior to implementation of any reclassification or AMIN alleges that by issuing EOs 364 and 379, the
upgrading of positions in government. This is consonant Executive has impaired the powers of Congress. AMIN
to the mandate of the DBM under the RAC of 1987, contends that since the DAR, PCUP and NCIP were
Section 3, Chapter 1, Title XVII, to wit: created by statutes,they can only be transformed,
SEC. 3. Powers and Functions. – assist the President in merged or attached by statutes, not by mere executive
the preparation of a national resources and orders.
expenditures budget, preparation, execution and control
of the National Budget, preparation and maintenance of MDOI alleges that it is concerned with the negative
accounting systems essential to the budgetary process, impact of NCIP becoming an attached agency of the DAR
achievement of more economy and efficiency in the on the processing of ancestral domain claims.
management of government operations, administration
of compensation and position classification systems, Issue:
assessment of organizational effectiveness and review WON the Executive has the power to place the
and evaluation of legislative proposals having budgetary Presidential Commission for the Urban Poor (PCUP)
or organizational implications. under the supervision and control of the DAR, and the
National Commission on Indigenous Peoples (NCIP)
4. The CA incorrectly relied on the pronouncement of under the DAR as an attached agency.
the CSC-Central Office that the CHR is a constitutional
commission, and as such enjoys fiscal autonomy. The HELD:
Constitution states in no uncertain terms that only the YES. The Constitution confers, by express provision, the
CSC, the COMELEC, and the COA shall be tagged as power of control over executive departments, bureaus
Constitutional Commissions with the appurtenant right and offices in the President alone. And it lays down a
to fiscal autonomy. limitation on the legislative power.
 The Constitution’s express grant of the power of
control in the President justifies an executive
10
Administrative Law Case Digests
action to carry out reorganization measures court of appeals who reversed the decision of the RTC.
under a broad authority of law. 6. Petitioner appealed to the supreme court.
 Administrative Code of 1987 Sec. 31: “The
President, subject to the policy in the Executive ISSUE:
Office and in order to achieve simplicity, Whether or not, the reorganization of the national
economy and efficiency, shall have continuing tobacco administration is valid.
authority to reorganize the administrative
structure of the Office of the President” HELD:
o The consolidation of functions in E.O. According to the SC, the president has the power to
364 aims to attain the objectives of reorganized an office to achieve simplicity ,economy and
simplicity, economy and efficiency as efficiency as provided under executive
gathered from the provision granting order 292 sec. 31 and section 48 of RA 7645 which
PCUP and NCIP access to the range of provides that activities of executive agencies may be
services provided by the DARs technical scaled down if it is no longer essential for the
offices and support systems. delivery of public service.
 On the issue of Sec 16 Art. 13 of the
Constitution(The right of the people and their WHEREFORE, the Motion to Admit Petition for En Banc
organizations to effective and reasonable resolution and the Petition for an En Banc Resolution are
participation at all levels of social, political, and
DENIED for lack of merit.
economic decision-making shall not be abridged.
The State shall, by law, facilitate the
establishment of adequate consultation
mechanisms)being violated: the state merely Nat’l Land Titles and Deeds Registration Admin
facilitates this participation, and not necessarily (NALTDRA) VS Civil Service Commission
create these mechanisms. The State provides
the support, but eventually it is the people, FACTS:
properly organized in their associations, who  Garcia was an LLB grad and a first grade civil service.
can assert the right and pursue the objective.  She was appointed Deputy Register of Deeds VII.
 She was later appointed as Deputy Register of
Deeds III, upon reclassification of the position.
BAGAOISAN VS NAT'L TOBACCO ADMINISTRATION
 She was designated as Acting Branch Register of
Deeds of Meycauayan, Bulacan.
FACTS:  Executive Order No. 649 was enacted.
 It authorized the restructuring of the Land
1. The petitioner was terminated from there position in Registration Commission to National Land Titles
the national tobacco administration as a result of the and Deeds Registration Administration, and it
executive order issued by president Estradawhic regionalized the offices of the registers therein.
mandates for the stream lining of the national tobacco  The law imposed a new requirement of BAR
administration, a government agency under the membership to qualify for permanent
department of agriculture. appointment as Deputy Register od Deeds II or
higher.
2. The petitioners filed a letter of appeal to the civil  Garcia issued an appointment as Deputy Register of
service commission to recall the ossp. Deeds II on temporary status for not being a member
of the Philippine Bar.
3. Petitioner all file a petition for certiorari with  Sec. of Justice notified Garcia of the termination of
prohibition an mandamus with prayer for preliminary her services on the ground that she was receiving
mandatory injunction and a temporary restraining Bribe Money.
order with the regional trial court of Batak to prevent  Garcia appealed, but the Merit Systems
the respondent from enforcing the notice of termination Protection Board (MSPB) dropped her appeal on
and from austing the petitioners in there the ground that the termination of her services
respective offices. was due to the expiration of her temporary
appointment.
4. The regional trial court issued an order ordering the  The CSC issued a resolution, directing that Garcia be
national tobacco administration to appoint the restored to her position.
petitioner to the osspto position similar to the  According to the CSC, under the vested right
one that they hold before. theory, the new requirement of the BAR
5. The national tobacco administration appealed to the membership will not apply to her but only to the

11
Administrative Law Case Digests
filling up of vacant lawyer position on or after and its duties, for reasons of economy, are given
Feb 9, 1981, the date the order took effect. to an existing office.
 NALTDRA assailed the validity of the CSC Resolution  In this case, EO No. 649 was enacted to improve
the services and better systematize the LRC. The
requirement of Bar membership was imposed to
ISSUE: meet changing circumstnaces and new
developments. It was imposed concomitant with
WON membership in the bar, which is a qualification
a valid reorganization measure.
requirement prescribed for appointment to the position
 Re: “Vested right theory,” no such thing as a vested
of Deputy Register of Deeds under EO. No. 649, Section
interest or estate in an office, except constitutional
4, should be applied only to new applicants and not to offices which provide for special immunity as regards
those who were already in service of the LRC as deputy salary and tenure.
register of deeds at the time of the issuance and
implementation of the EO.
JUDGMENT: Garcia has no vested property right to be
HELD: re-employed in a reorganized office. She cannot be
reinstated to her former position. CSC Resolution
No. The requirement shall also apply to those already in
reinstating Garcia was set aside.
service.

RATIO:
EUGENIO vs. CSC
 EO No. 649, in express terms, provided for the
abolition of existing positions: FACTS:
Eugenio is the Deputy Director of the Philippine
 Section 8. Abolition of Existing Positions. All
Nuclear Research Institute. She applied for a Career
structural units in the LRC and in the registries of
Executive Service (CES) Eligibility and a CESO
deeds, and all positions therein shall cease to rank,. She was given a CES eligibility and was
exist from the date specified in the recommended to the President for a CESO rank by
implementing order to be issued by the the Career Executive Service Board.
president pursuant to the preceding par. The Then respondent Civil Service Commission passed a
pertinent functions, applicable appropriations, Resolution which abolished the CESB, relying on the
records, equipment and property shall be provisions of Section 17, Title I, Subtitle A. Book V
transferred to the appropriate staff or offices of the Administrative Code of 1987 allegedly
therein created. conferring on the Commission the power and
 The law, therefore, mandates that from the authority to effect changes in its organization as the
moment an implementing order is issued, all need arises. Said resolution states:
positions in the LRC is deemed non-existent. “Pursuant thereto, the Career Executive Service
This is NOT removal. Removal implied post Board, shall now be known as the Office for Career
Executive Service of the Civil Service Commission.
subsists and one is merely separated therefrom,
Accordingly, the existing personnel, budget,
while here, there is no position at all. Thus,
properties and equipment of the Career Executive
there can be no tenure to speak of. Service Board shall now form part of the Office for
 Abolition of office is valid if (1) carried out by a Career Executive Service.”
legitimate body and (2) done in good faith.
(1) LEGITIMATE BODY Finding herself bereft of further administrative
relief as the Career Executive Service Board which
 In this case, it was by LEGITIMATE BODY. There recommended her CESO Rank IV has been
is no dispute over the authority to carry out a abolished, petitioner filed the petition at bench to
valid reorganization in any branch/agency of annul, among others, said resolution.
gov’t under Sec 8, Article XVII of the 1973
Consti. ISSUE:
(2) GOOD FAITH WON CSC given the authority to abolish the office of
the CESB
 Re: good faith, if the newly created office has
substantially new, different or additional HELD:
functions, duties or powers, so that it may be
said in fact to create an office different from the The petition is granted and Resolution of the
one abolished, even though it embraces all or respondent Commission is hereby annulled and set
some of the duties of the old office, it will be aside
considered an abolition and creation of new NO
one. The same is true if the office is abolished 1. The controlling fact is that the CESB was created
in PD No. 1 on September 1, 1974. It cannot be
12
Administrative Law Case Digests
disputed, therefore, that as the CESB was created by
law, it can only be abolished by the legislature. This
follows an unbroken stream of rulings that the
creation and abolition of public offices is primarily a
legislative function
In the petition at bench, the legislature has not
enacted any law authorizing the abolition of the
CESB. On the contrary, in all the General
Appropriations Acts from 1975 to 1993, the
legislature has set aside funds for the operation of
CESB.

Respondent Commission, however, invokes Section


LARIN VS. EXECUTVE SECRETARY
17, Chapter 3, Subtitle A. Title I, Book V of the
Administrative Code of 1987 as the source of its
power to abolish the CESB. FACTS:
Petitioner AquilinoLarin is the Assistant Commissioner of
the Bureau of Internal Revenue, and he also appears to
But as well pointed out by petitioner and the be a co- accused in two criminal cases for violating
Solicitor General, Section 17 must be read together Section 268(4) of the National Internal Revenue Code
with Section 16 of the said Code which enumerates and Section 3 of R.A. 3019. Subsequently petitioner was
the offices under the respondent Commission. convicted and this was reported to the President, the
then Senior Deputy Executive Secretary by the authority
As read together, the inescapable conclusion is that
of the president issued Memo order 164 creating an
respondent Commission’s power to reorganize is
limited to offices under its control as enumerated in executive committee to investigate the administrative
Section 16. charges.
The committee required that petitioner filed a position
2. From its inception, the CESB was intended to be paper with regard to the charges against him, the
an autonomous entity, albeit administratively petitioner complied, and however his statement was
attached to respondent Commission. As that he cannot comment on the merits of the case for
conceptualized by the Reorganization Committee fear of being cited in contempt by the court. Petitioner
“the CESB shall be autonomous. It is expected to also alleged that the committee doesn’t have any
view the problem of building up executive jurisdiction over his person, that the case cannot be
manpower in the government with a broad and validly filed without violating res judicata, his rights
positive outlook.” against double jeopardy and lastly to proceed with the
The essential autonomous character of the CESB is investigation would be redundant and oppressive
not negated by its attachment to respondent
against him. While all this is pending, the president
Commission. By said attachment, CESB
issued an order for the streamlining of BIR, in which case
was notmade to fall within the control of respondent
Commission. Under the Administrative Code of the office of the petitioner was abolished by the order.
1987, the purpose of attaching one functionally His office being abolished, the petitioner was not
inter-related government agency to another is to reinstated as an assistant commissioner of BIR, instead
attain “policy and program coordination.” This is another Administrative order was issued in which it
clearly etched out in Section 38(3), Chapter 7, Book stated that he is being dismissed for being guilty of grave
IV of the aforecited Code, to wit: misconduct in connection to the criminal cases filed
(3) Attachment. — (a) This refers to the lateral against him.
relationship between the department or its
equivalent and attached agency or corporation for ISSUES:
purposes of policy and program coordination. The a. Who has the power to discipline the petitioner
coordination may be accomplished by having the b. Was due process observed
department represented in the governing board of c. What is the effect of the petitioners acquittal in the
the attached agency or corporation, either as
criminal case
chairman or as a member, with or without voting
d. Does the president have the power to reorganize BIR
rights, if this is permitted by the charter; having the
attached corporation or agency comply with a e. Was the reorganization done in bad faith.
system of periodic reporting which shall reflect the
progress of programs and projects; and having the HELD:
department or its equivalent provide general The court ruled that the office of the petitioner falls
policies through its representative in the board, under the category of Career Executive Service, which is
which shall serve as the framework for the internal appointed by the president and being a presidential
policies of the attached corporation or agency. appointee, it follows that the president have the power

13
Administrative Law Case Digests
to discipline the petitioner. Despite the fact that the
constitution grants the president the power to appoint
and the inherent power to remove, such power is not
without limit. Under the Administrative code of 1987,
career services are characterized to have security of
tenure, therefore the petitioner is protected from being
willfully removed by the president, the only way that the
petitioner can be validly removed is for a valid cause and
in accordance with the procedural due process.
According to the Court it found that, although the
procedural due process was followed and complied with
the petitioner was not removed for a valid cause, since
to start with the committee was created to investigate
the administrative aspect of the criminal cases being
faced by the petitioner at that time. Now taking into
consideration that the petitioner was acquitted from the
criminal cases, the court believes that there is no ground AZARCON VS SANDIGANBAYAN
for the administrative case to continue. It is admitted
that criminal cases and administrative cases usually FACTS:
progress independently, however in this case it was Petitioner Alfredo Azarcon owned and operated an
proven in the criminal case that the petitioner never earth-moving business, hauling dirt and ore. His services
committed any of the alleged acts, therefore the case for were contracted by PICOP. Occasionally, he engaged the
the administrative case was also terminated, and services of sub-contractors like Jaime Ancla whose trucks
therefore there is no longer any valid cause for the were left at the former’s premises.
removal of the petitioner. On May 25, 1983, a Warrant of Distraint of Personal
As for the validity of E.O. 132 which reorganized the BIR, Property was issued by BIR commanding one of its
the court ruled that the president has the authority to Regional Directors to distraint the goods, chattels or
do so, as seen in the preamble of the E.O. which stated effects and other personal property of Jaime Ancla, a
the legal basis of its issuance. Though it is admitted that sub-contractor of accused Azarcon and a delinquent
the president had the power to reorganize the BIR, the taxpayer. A Warrant of Garnishment was issued to and
court stated that such power is not limitless, the subsequently signed by accused Azarcon ordering him to
reorganization to be valid must be done in good faith. In transfer, surrender, transmit and/or remit to BIR the
the instant case the court found that the reorganization property in his possession owned by Ancla. Azarcon then
was done in bad faith or at least there are indications of volunteered himself to act as custodian of the truck
bad faith, such as when the E.O. abolished the owned by Ancla.
intelligence and investigation office and at the same After some time, Azarcon wrote a letter to the Reg. Dir
time creating Intelligence and Investigation service to do of BIR stating that while he had made representations to
the same functions of the abolished office. Most retain possession of the property of Ancla, he thereby
importantly is the non reappointment of the petitioner, relinquishes whatever responsibility he had over the said
the petitioner being a holder of a career service, should property since Ancla surreptitiously withdrew his
have been prioritized or preferred in appointing people equipment from him. In his reply, the BIR Reg. Dir. said
to new offices created by the reorganization, but in this that Azarcon’s failure to comply with the provisions of
case the petitioner was never reappointed instead he the warrant did not relieve him from his responsibility.
was dismissed from service without any separation Along with his co-accused, Azarcon was charged before
benefits at all. The court ruled that the petitioner is the Sandiganbayan with the crime of malversation of
reinstated as an assistant commissioner and is entitled public funds or property. On March 8, 1994, the
to back wages. Sandiganbayan rendered a Decision sentencing the
accused to suffer the penalty of imprisonment ranging
from 10 yrs and 1 day of prision mayor in its maximum
period to 17 yrs, 4 mos and 1 day of reclusion temporal.
Petitioner filed a motion for new trial which was
subsequently denied by Sandiganbayan. Hence, this
petition.

ISSUE:
Whether or not Sandiganbayan has jurisdiction over a
private individual designated by BIR as a custodian of
distrained property.

14
Administrative Law Case Digests
HELD: Thus, on June 12, 1991, HIGC sold 2.48 hectares of the
SC held that the Sandiganbayan’s decision was null and property to UNITED. The deed of conditional sale
void for lack of jurisdiction. provided that ten (10) per cent of the purchase price
Sec. 4 of PD 1606 provides for the jurisdiction of the would be paid upon signing, with the balance to be
Sandiganbayan. It was specified therein that the only amortized within one year from its date of execution.
instances when the Sandiganbayan will have jurisdiction After UNITED made its final payment on January 31,
over a private individual is when the complaint charges 1992, HIGC executed a Deed of Absolute Sale dated July
the private individual either as a co-principal, accomplice 1, 1992.
or accessory of a public officer or employee who has Petitioner alleges that sometime in 1993, private
been charged with a crime within its jurisdiction. respondents entered the Dominican Hills property
The Information does no charge petitioner Azarcon of allocated to UNITED and constructed houses thereon.
becoming a co-principal, accomplice or accessory to a Petitioner was able to secure a demolition order from
public officer committing an offense under the the city mayor. Unable to stop the razing of their
Sandiganbayan’s jurisdiction. Thus, unless the petitioner houses, private respondents, under the name
be proven a public officer, Sandiganbayan will have no DOMINICAN HILL BAGUIO RESIDENTS HOMELESS
jurisdiction over the crime charged. ASSOCIATION (ASSOCIATION, for brevity) filed an action
Art. 203 of the RPC determines who public officers are. for injunction before RTC Baguio City. Private
Granting that the petitioner, in signing the receipt for respondents were able to obtain a temporary restraining
the truck constructively distrained by the BIR, order but their prayer for a writ of preliminary injunction
commenced to take part in an activity constituting public was later denied.
functions, he obviously may not be deemed authorized The ASSOCIATION filed a separate civil case for damages,
by popular election. Neither was he appointed by direct injunction and annulment of the said MOA. It was later
provision of law nor by competent authority. While BIR on dismissed upon motion of United. The said Order of
had authority to require Azarcon to sign a receipt for the dismissal is currently on appeal with the Court of
distrained truck, the National Internal Revenue Code did Appeals.
not grant it power to appoint Azarcon a public officer. The demolition order was subsequently implemented by
The BIR’s power authorizing a private individual to act as the Office of the City Mayor and the City Engineer's
a depositary cannot be stretched to include the power to Office of Baguio City. However, petitioner avers that
appoint him as a public officer. Thus, Azarcon is not a private respondents returned and reconstructed the
public officer. demolished structures.
THE UNITED RESIDENTS OF DOMINICAN HILL, INC VS To forestall the re-implementation of the demolition
COMMISSION ON THE SETTLEMENT OF LAND order, private respondents filed a petition for annulment
PROBLEMS of contracts with prayer for a temporary restraining
order before the Commission on the Settlement of Land
FACTS: Problems (COSLAP) against petitioner, HIGC, PMS, the
Dominican Hills, formerly registered as Diplomat Hills in City Engineer's Office, the City Mayor, as well as the
Baguio City, was mortgaged to the United Coconut Register of Deeds of Baguio City. On the very same day,
Planters Bank (UCPB). It was eventually foreclosed and public respondent COSLAP issued the contested order
acquired later on by the said bank as the highest bidder. requiring the parties to maintain the status quo.
On 11 April 1983, through its President Eduardo Without filing a motion for reconsideration from the
Cojuangco Jr., the subject property was donated to the aforesaid status quo order, petitioner filed the instant
Republic of the Philippines. The deed of donation petition questioning the jurisdiction of the COSLAP.
stipulated that Dominican Hills would be utilized for the
"priority programs, projects, activities in human ISSUE:
settlements and economic development and WON COSLAP is empowered to hear and try a petition
governmental purposes" of the Ministry of Human for annulment of contracts with prayer for a TRO and to
Settlements. issue a status quo order and conduct a hearing thereof?
On December 12, 1986, then President Corazon Aquino
issued EO 85 abolishing the Ministry of Human RULING:
Settlements. All agencies under the its supervision as COSLAP is not justified in assuming jurisdiction over the
well as all its assets, programs and projects, were controversy. It discharges quasi-judicial functions:
transferred to the Presidential Management Staff (PMS). "Quasi-judicial function" is a term which applies to the
On 18 October 1988, United (Dominican Hills) submitted actions, discretion, etc. of public administrative officers
its application before the PMS to acquire a portion of the or bodies, who are required to investigate facts, or
Dominican Hills property. In a MOA, PMS and United ascertain the existence of facts, hold hearings, and draw
agreed that the latter may purchase a portion of the said conclusions from them, as a basis for their official action
property from HOME INSURANCE GUARANTY and to exercise discretion of a judicial nature."
CORPORATIO, acting as originator, on a selling price of However, it does not depart from its basic nature as an
P75.00 per square meter. administrative agency, albeit one that exercises quasi-
15
Administrative Law Case Digests
judicial functions. Still, administrative agencies are not (MARO) Belen T. Babalcon conducted an ocular
considered courts; they are neither part of the judicial inspection of the property and an actual “headcount”
system nor are they deemed judicial tribunals. The was conducted.
doctrine of separation of powers observed in our system PARO Durante L. Ubeda recommended the exclusion
of government reposes the three (3) great powers into from CARP coverage a total of 219.50 has: 134 has. for
its three (3) branches — the legislative, the executive, cattle-grazing, 28 has. for horse and carabao grazing,
and the judiciary — each department being co-equal and 12.5 has. for infrastructure and 45 has. for retention of
coordinate, and supreme in its own sphere. Accordingly, nine landowners. The applicants, through Uy, wrote a
the executive department may not, by its own fiat, letter to DAR Region IV Director Percival C. Dalugdug
impose the judgment of one of its own agencies, upon requesting for a reinvestigation of the Report of PARO
the judiciary. Indeed, under the expanded jurisdiction of Ubeda. Dir. Daludug affirmed the findings of Ubeda. The
the Supreme Court, it is empowered "to determine applicants then appealed the order to the DAR
whether or not there has been grave abuse of discretion Secretary. The DAR partially granted the appeal only
amounting to lack of or excess of jurisdiction on the part with respect with the 219.50 hectares. The applicants
of any branch or instrumentality of the Government." appealed the order to the OP via an Appeal with Prayer
for Status Quo/Stay of Execution. The President, through
then Deputy Executive Secretary Renato C. Corona
rendered a decision dismissing the appeal for lack of
merit, saying that private agricultural lands or portions
thereof exclusively, directly and actually used for
livestock, poultry and swine raising as of 15 June 1988
shall be excluded from the coverage of CARP. Corona
said By simple reading, it is obvious that the livestock,
poultry and swine, in order to be included in the
computation of the area to be exempted from CARP
coverage, should have been existing in the area sought
to be exempted at the time of the effectivity of RA 6657,
which is June 15, 1988. However, on October 5, 1998,
then Chief Presidential Legal Adviser Harriet Demetriou
submitted the following Memorandum to the President,
advising the latter to exclude the land in question
completely. A second motion for reconsideration was
filed and the OP acted upon the said MR.

ISSUE:
Whether or not the OP is empowered to entertain the
second motion for reconsideration filed before it.
DEPARTMENT OF AGRARIAN REFORM VS UY
HELD:
FACTS: Yes. It is settled that rules of procedure are, as a matter
Dr. Vicente K. Uy, Wellington K. Ong, Jaime Chua, and of course, construed liberally in proceedings before
Daniel Sy, among others, are owners of a 349.9996-ha administrative bodies. Thus, technical rules of procedure
parcel of land located in Barangay Camaflora, Barrio of imposed in judicial proceedings are unavailing in cases
San Andres, Municipality of San Narciso, Province of before administrative bodies. Administrative bodies are
Quezon. The property is covered by Transfer Certificate not bound by the technical niceties of law and procedure
of Title (TCT) No. 160988. Sometime in 1993, some 44 and the rules obtaining in the courts of law. Rules of
farmers who occupied portions of the property filed procedure are not to be applied in a very rigid and
petitions in the DAR, seeking to be declared as owners- technical manner, as they are used only to help secure
beneficiaries. The DAR issued a Notice of Coverage and not to override substantial justice. The SC ruled that
under the CARP over the property. For his part, the doctrine of exhaustion of administrative remedies
respondent, in behalf of the co-owners, filed an empowers the OP to review any determination or
Application for Exclusion in the form of a letter, through disposition of a department head. In fact, the doctrine
Provincial Agrarian Reform Officer (PARO) Durante L. requires an administrative decision to first be appealed
Ubeda. To substantiate his request to exclude their to the administrative superiors up to the highest level
landholding from CARP coverage under the Luz Farms before it may be elevated to a court of justice for review.
ruling, respondent declared that their property had been Thus, if a remedy within the administrative machinery
exclusively used for livestock-raising for several years can still be had by giving the administrative officer
prior to June 15, 1988. The Provincial Task Force on concerned every opportunity to decide on the matter
Exclusion led by Municipal Agrarian Reform Officer that comes within his jurisdiction, then such remedy
16
Administrative Law Case Digests
should be priorly exhausted before the court's judicial Three days later, on February 2, 1987, the Filipino
power is invoked people adopted the new Constitution.
DARIO VS MISON On January 6, 1988, incumbent Commissioner of
Customs Salvador Mison issued a Memorandum, in the
FACTS: nature of "Guidelines on the Implementation of
On March 25, 1986, President Corazon Aquino Reorganization Executive Orders," prescribing the
promulgated Proclamation No. 3, "DECLARING A procedure in personnel placement. On the same date,
NATIONAL POLICY TO IMPLEMENT THE REFORMS Commissioner Mison constituted a Reorganization
MANDATED BY THE PEOPLE, PROTECTING THEIR BASIC Appeals Board charged with adjudicating appeals from
RIGHTS, ADOPTING A PROVISIONAL CONSTITUTION, removals under the above Memorandum. On January
AND PROVIDING FOR AN ORDERLY TRANSITION TO A 26, 1988, Commissioner Mison addressed several
GOVERNMENT UNDER A NEW CONSTITUTION. Among notices to various Customs officials.
other things, Proclamation No. 3 provided: As far as the records will likewise reveal, a total of 394
SECTION 1. The President shall give priority to measures officials and employees of the Bureau of Customs were
to achieve the mandate of the people to: given individual notices of separation. A number
(a) Completely reorganize the government, eradicate supposedly sought reinstatement with the
unjust and oppressive structures, and all iniquitous Reorganization Appeals Board while others went to the
vestiges of the previous regime. Civil Service Commission. The first thirty one mentioned
Actually, the reorganization process started as early as above came directly to this Court. The records indeed
February 25, 1986, when the President, in her first act in show that Commissioner Mison separated about 394
office, called upon "all appointive public officials to Customs personnel but replaced them with 522 as of
submit their courtesy resignations beginning with the August 18, 1988.
members of the Supreme Court." Later on, she abolished On June 30, 1988, the Civil Service Commission
the BatasangPambansa and the positions of Prime promulgated its ruling ordering the reinstatement of the
Minister and Cabinet under the 1973 Constitution. 279 employees. On July 15, 1988, Commissioner Mison,
On May 28, 1986, the President enacted Executive Order represented by the Solicitor General, filed a motion for
No. 17, "PRESCRIBING RULES AND REGULATIONS FOR reconsideration. Acting on the motion, the Civil Service
THE IMPLEMENTATION OF SECTION 2, ARTICLE III OF Commission, on September 20, 1988, denied
THE FREEDOM CONSTITUTION." Executive Order No. 17 reconsideration. On October 20, 1988, Commissioner
recognized the "unnecessary anxiety and demoralization Mison instituted certiorari proceedings with this Court.
among the deserving officials and employees" the On November 16, 1988, the Civil Service Commission
ongoing government reorganization had generated, and further disposed the appeal (from the resolution of the
prescribed several grounds for the Reorganization Appeals Board) of five more employees.
separation/replacement of personnel. On January 6, 1989, Commissioner Misonchallenged the
Specifically, she said on May 28, 1986: WHEREAS, in Civil Service Commission’s Resolution in this Court.
order to obviate unnecessary anxiety and demoralization
among the deserving officials and employees, ISSUE: Whether or not Executive Order No. 127, which
particularly in the career civil service, it is necessary to provided for the reorganization of the Bureau of
prescribe the rules and regulations for implementing the Customs is valid
said constitutional provision to protect career civil
servants whose qualifications and performance meet the RULING:
standards of service demanded by the New Yes. There is no question that the administration may
Government, and to ensure that only those found validly carry out a government reorganization — insofar
corrupt, inefficient and undeserving are separated from as these cases are concerned, the reorganization of the
the government service. Noteworthy is the injunction Bureau of Customs — by mandate not only of the
embodied in the Executive Order that dismissals should Provisional Constitution, supra, but also of the various
be made on the basis of findings of inefficiency, graft, Executive Orders decreed by the Chief Executive in her
and unfitness to render public service. The President’s capacity as sole lawmaking authority under the 1986-
Memorandum of October 14, 1987 should furthermore 1987 revolutionary government. It should also be noted
be considered. We quote, in part: Further to the that under the present Constitution, there is a
Memorandum dated October 2, 1987 on the same recognition, albeit implied, that a government
subject, I have ordered that there will be no further lay- reorganization may be legitimately undertaken, subject
offs this year of personnel as a result of the government to certain conditions.
reorganization. The core provision of law involved is Section 16 Article
On January 30, 1987, the President promulgated XVIII, of the 1987 Constitution.
Executive Order No. 127, "REORGANIZING THE MINISTRY Sec. 16. Career civil service employees separated from
OF FINANCE." Among other offices, Executive Order No. the service not for cause but as a result of the
127 provided for the reorganization of the Bureau of reorganization pursuant to Proclamation No. 3 dated
Customs and prescribed a new staffing pattern therefor. March 25, 1986 and the reorganization following the
17
Administrative Law Case Digests
ratification of this Constitution shall be entitled to The records indeed show that Commissioner Mison
appropriate separation pay and to retirement and other separated about 394 Customs personnel but replaced
benefits accruing to them under the laws of general them with 522 as of August 18, 1988. This betrays a clear
application in force at the time of their separation. In intent to "pack" the Bureau of Customs. He did so,
lieu thereof, at the option of the employees, they may furthermore, in defiance of the President’s directive to
be considered for employment in the Government or in halt further lay-offs as a consequence of reorganization.
any of its subdivisions, instrumentalities, or agencies, Finally, he was aware that lay-offs should observe the
including government-owned or controlled corporations procedure laid down by Executive
and their subsidiaries. This provision also applies to Order No. 17. We are not, of course, striking down
career officers whose resignation, tendered in line with Executive Order No. 127 for repugnancy to the
the existing policy, had been accepted. Constitution. While the act is valid, still and all, the
It is also to be observed that unlike the grants of power means with which it was implemented is not.
to effect reorganizations under the past Constitutions, It can be seen that the Act, insofar as it provides for
the above provision comes as a mere recognition of the reinstatement of employees separated without "a valid
right of the Government to reorganize its offices, cause and after due notice and hearing" is not contrary
bureaus, and instrumentalities. to the transitory provisions of the new Constitution. The
Other than references to "reorganization following the Court reiterates that although the Charter’s transitory
ratification of this Constitution," there is no provision for provisions mention separations "not for cause,"
"automatic" vacancies under the 1987 Constitution. separations thereunder must nevertheless be on
Invariably, transition periods are characterized by account of a valid reorganization and which do not come
provisions for "automatic" vacancies. They are dictated about automatically. Otherwise, security of tenure may
by the need to hasten the passage from the old to the be invoked. Moreover, it can be seen that the statute
new Constitution free from the "fetters" of due process itself recognizes removals without cause. However, it
and security of tenure. also acknowledges the possibility of the leadership using
At this point, we must distinguish removals from the artifice of reorganization to frustrate security of
separations arising from abolition of office (not by virtue tenure. For this reason, it has installed safeguards. There
of the Constitution) as a result of reorganization carried is nothing unconstitutional about the Act.
out by reason of economy or to remove redundancy of RATIO: Reorganizations have been regarded as valid
functions. In the latter case, the Government is obliged provided they are pursued in good faith.
to prove good faith. In case of removals undertaken to
comply with clear and explicit constitutional mandates,
the Government is not hard put to prove anything,
plainly and simply because the Constitution allows it.
Reorganizations in this jurisdiction have been regarded
as valid provided they are pursued in good faith. As a
general rule, a reorganization is carried out in "good
faith" if it is for the purpose of economy or to make
bureaucracy more efficient. In that event, no dismissal
(in case of a dismissal) or separation actually occurs
because the position itself ceases to exist. And in that
case, security of tenure would not be aChinese wall. Be
that as it may, if the "abolition," which is nothing else
but a separation or removal, is done for political reasons
or purposely to defeat security of tenure, or otherwise
not in good faith, no valid "abolition" takes place and
whatever "abolition" is done, is void ab initio. There is an CANONIZADO VS. AGUIRRE
invalid "abolition" as where there is merely a change of
nomenclature of positions, or where claims of economy FACTS:
are belied by the existence of ample funds. Petitioners were duly appointed Commissioners of the
It is to be stressed that by predisposing a reorganization National Police Commission (NAPOLCOM) – created by
to the yardstick of good faith, we are not, as a virtue of RA 6975. Upon the passing of the amendatory
consequence, imposing a "cause" for restructuring. law, RA 8851 a.k.a "Philippine National Police Reform
Retrenchment in the course of a reorganization in good and Reorganization Act of 1998," it declared that the
faith is still removal "not for cause," if by "cause" we terms of the current Commissioners were deemed as
refer to "grounds" or conditions that call for disciplinary expired upon its effectivity.
action. Good faith, as a component of a reorganization Petitioners assail the constitutionality of sections 4 and 8
under a constitutional regime, is judged from the facts of of RA 8551. Petitioners argue that their removal from
each case. office by virtue of section 8 of RA 8551 violates their
constitutionally guaranteed right to security of tenure.
18
Administrative Law Case Digests
Public respondents insist that the express declaration in
section 8 of RA 8551 that the terms of petitioners offices HELD:
are deemed expired discloses the legislative intent to SC held that NHA (now HLURB) has jurisdiction.
impliedly abolish the NAPOLCOM created under RA 6975 In case of conflict between a general law and a special
pursuant to a bona fide reorganization. Petitioners posit law, the latter must prevail regardless of the dates of
the theory that the abolition of petitioners offices was a their enactment. It is obvious that the general law in this
result of a reorganization of the NAPOLCOM allegedly case is BP 129 and PD 1344 the special law.
effected by RA 8551. On the competence of the Board to award damages, we
find that this is part of the exclusive power conferred
ISSUES: upon it by PD 1344 to hear and decide “claims involving
1. WHETHER OR NOT petitioners were removed by refund and any other claims filed by subdivision lot or
virtue of a valid abolition of their office by Congress. condominium unit buyers against the project owner,
2. WHETHER OR NOT sections 4 and 8 are developer, dealer, broker or salesman.”
unconstitutional. As a result of the growing complexity of the modern
society, it has become necessary to create more and
HELD: more administrative bodies to help in the regulation of
NO. Petitioners were not removed by virtue of a valid its ramified activities. Specialized in the particular fields
abolition of their office by Congress. First of all, RA 8551 assigned to them, they can deal with the problems
did not expressly abolish petitioners positions. “Public thereof with more expertise and dispatch than can be
respondents would have this Court believe that RA 8551 expected from the legislature or the courts of justice.
reorganized the NAPOLCOM resulting in the abolition of This is the reason for the increasing vesture of quasi-
petitioners offices. legislative and quasi-judicial powers in what is now not
We hold that there has been absolutely no attempt by unreasonably called the fourth department of the
Congress to effect such a reorganization…No bona fide government.
reorganization of the NAPOLCOM having been Statues conferring powers on their administrative
mandated by Congress, RA 8551, insofar as it declares agencies must be liberally construed to enable them to
the terms of office of the incumbent Commissioners, discharge their assigned duties in accordance with the
petitioners herein, as expired and resulting in their legislative purpose.
removal from office, removes civil service employees
from office without legal cause and must therefore be
struck down for being constitutionally infirm.”
YES. In the dispositive portion of the decision, the Court
granted the petition “but only to the extent of declaring
section 8 of RA 8551 unconstitutional for being in
violation of the petitioners right to security of tenure.
The removal from office of petitioners as a result of the
application of such unconstitutional provision of law and
the appointment of new Commissioners in their stead is
therefore null and void.”
GLOBE WIRELESS LTD VS. PUBLIC SERVICE
COMMISSION AND ANTONIO B. ARNAIZ

Challenged in this petition for certiorari is the


jurisdiction of the defunct Public Service Commission
[PSC] under Section 21 of Commonwealth Act No. 146,
as amended, to discipline and impose a fine upon
SOLID HOMES INC VS PAYAWAL petitioner, Globe Wireless, Ltd., a duly-organized
Philippine corporation engaged in international
FACTS: telecommunication business under a franchise granted
Payawal is a buyer of a certain subdivision lot who is by Public Acts Nos. 3495, 3692 and 4150, as amended by
suing Solid Homes for failure to deliver the certificate of Republic Act No. 4630.
title. The complaint was filed with the RTC. Solid Homes A message addressed to Maria Diaz, Monte Esquina 30,
contended that jurisdiction is with the National Housing Madrid, Spain, filed by private respondent Antonio B.
Authority (NHA) pursuant to PD 957, as amended by PD Arnaiz with the telegraph office of the Bureau of
1344 granting exclusive jurisdiction to NHA. Telecommunications in Dumaguete City was transmitted
to the Bureau of Telecommunications in Manila. It was
ISSUE: forwarded to petitioner Globe Wireless Ltd. for
W/N NHA has jurisdiction to try the case and the transmission to Madrid. Petitioner sent the message to
competence to award damages the American Cable and Radio Corporation in New York,
19
Administrative Law Case Digests
which, in turn, transmitted the same to the Too basic in administrative law to need citation of
EmpresaNacional de Telecomunicaciones in Madrid. The jurisprudence is the rule that the jurisdiction and powers
latter, however, mislaid said message, resulting in its of administrative agencies, like respondent Commission,
non-delivery to the addressee. are limited to those expressly granted or necessarily
After being informed of said fact, private respondent implied from those granted in the legislation creating
Arnaiz sent to then Public Service Commissioner Enrique such body; and any order without or beyond such
Medina an unverified letter-complaint relating the jurisdiction is void and ineffective. The order under
incident. The complaint was docketed as PSC Case No. consideration belonged to this category.
65-39-OC and petitioner was required to answer the ACCORDINGLY, the instant petition is hereby granted
same. Petitioner, in its answer, questioned PSC's and the order of respondent Public Service Commission
jurisdiction over the subject matter of the letter- in PSC Case No. 65-39-OC is set aside for being null and
complaint, even as it denied liability for the non-delivery void.
of the message to the addressee.
Hearing ensued, after which the PSC issued an order
finding petitioner "responsible for the inadequate and
unsatisfactory service complained of, in violation of the
Public Service Act", and ordering it "to pay a fine of TWO
HUNDRED [P200.00] PESOS under Sec. 21 of Com. Act
146, as amended." Petitioner was likewise required to
refund the sum of P19.14 to the remitter of the
undelivered message.
Its motion for reconsideration having been denied,
petitioner instituted the instant petition.
We find for petitioner.
Verily, Section 13 of Commonwealth Act No. 146, as
amended, otherwise known as the Public Service Act,
vested in the Public Service Commission jurisdiction,
supervision and control over all public services and their
franchises, equipment and other properties. However,
Section 5 of Republic Act No. 4630, the legislative
franchise under which petitioner was operating, limited
respondent Commission's jurisdiction over petitioner
only to the rate which petitioner may charge the public.
Thus,

"Sec. 5. The Public Service Commission is hereby given


jurisdiction over the grantee only with respect to the
rates which the grantee may charge the public subject to
international commitments made or adhered to by the
Republic of the Philippines." (Underscoring supplied.)
The act complained of consisted in petitioner having
allegedly failed to deliver the telegraphic message of RADIO COMMUNICATIONS OF THE PHILIPPINES, INC.
private respondent to the addressee in Madrid, Spain. (RCPI) VS NATIONAL TELECOMMUNICATIONS
Obviously, such imputed negligence had nothing COMMISSION (NTC)
whatsoever to do with the subject matter of the very
limited jurisdiction of the Commission over petitioner. FACTS:
Moreover, under Section 21 of C.A. No. 146, as Private respondent Juan A. Alegre's wife, Dr. Jimena
amended, the Commission was empowered to impose Alegre, sent two (2) RUSH telegrams through petitioner
an administrative fine in cases of violation of or failure RCPI's facilities in Taft Ave., Manila at 9:00 in the
by a public service to comply with the terms and morning of 17 March 1989 to his sister and brother-in-
conditions of any certificate or any orders, decisions or law in Valencia, Bohol and another sister-in-law in
regulations of the Commission. Petitioner operated Espiritu, Ilocos Norte.
under a legislative franchise, so there were no terms nor Both telegrams did not reach their destinations on the
conditions of any certificate issued by the Commission to expected dates. So, private respondent filed a letter-
violate. Neither was there any order, decision or complaint against RCPI with National
regulation from the Commission applicable to petitioner Telecommunications Commission (NTC) for poor service,
that the latter had allegedly violated, disobeyed, defied with a request for the imposition of the appropriate
or disregarded. punitive sanction against the company. Taking

20
Administrative Law Case Digests
cognizance of the complaint, NTC directed RCPI to claiming from the COA, based on sec. 699 of the RAC.
answer the complaint and set the initial hearing. COA contended that the RAC has been repealed by the
NTC held that RCPI was administratively liable for Administrative Code of 1987, specifically sec. 699 was
deficient and inadequate service under Section 19(a) of not restated nor re-enacted in the Code.
C.A. 146 and imposed the penalty of fine payable within
thirty (30) days from receipt in the aggregate amount of ISSUE:
one thousand pesos. W/N the Administrative Code of 1987 repealed or
Hence, RCPI filed this petition for review invoking C.A. abrogated sec. 699 of the RAC
146 Sec. 19(a) which limits the jurisdiction of the Public
Service Commission (precursor of the NTC) to the fixing HELD:
of rates. The question of whether or not a particular law has been
repealed or not by a subsequent law is a matter of
ISSUE: legislative intent. The lawmakers may expressly repeal a
Whether or not Public Service Commission (precursor of law by incorporating therein a repealing provision which
the NTC) has jurisdiction to impose fines expressly and specifically cites the particular law or laws,
and portions thereof, that are intended to be repealed.
HELD: A declaration in a statute, usually in its repealing clause,
The decision appealed from is reversed and set aside for that a particular and specific law, identified by its
lack of jurisdiction of the NTC to render it. number or title, is repealed is an express repeal; all
NTC has no jurisdiction to impose a fine. Under Section others are implied repeals.
21 of C. A. 146, as amended, the Commission was Under sec. 27, Bk. VII (Final Provisions) of the
empowered to impose an administrative fine in cases of Administrative Code of 1987, the repealing clause states
violation of or failure by a public service to comply with that “all laws, decrees, orders, rules and regulations, or
the terms and conditions of any certificate or any orders, portions thereof, inconsistent with this Code are hereby
decisions or regulations of the Commission. Petitioner repealed or modified accordingly.”
operated under a legislative franchise, so there were no The question that should be asked is: What is the nature
terms nor conditions of any certificate issued by the of this repealing clause? It is certainly not an express
Commission to violate. Neither was there any order, repealing clause because it fails to identify or designate
decision or regulation from the Commission applicable the act or acts that are intended to be repealed. Rather,
to petitioner that the latter had allegedly violated, it is an example of a general repealing provision. It is a
disobeyed, defied or disregarded. clause which predicates the intended repeal under the
No substantial change has been brought about by condition that a substantial conflict must be found in
Executive Order No. 546 invoked by the Solicitor existing and prior acts. The failure to add a specific
General's Office to bolster NTC's jurisdiction. The repealing clause indicates the intent was not to repeal
Executive Order is not an explicit grant of power to any existing law, unless an irreconcilable inconsistency
impose administrative fines on public service utilities, and repugnancy exist in the terms of the new and old
including telegraphic agencies, which have failed to laws. The latter situation falls under the category of an
render adequate service to consumers. Neither has it implied repeal.
expanded the coverage of the supervisory and (NOTA BENE: This means that the RAC, despite the
regulatory power of the agency. There appears to be no passage of the Administrative Code of 1987, may still be
alternative but to reiterate the settled doctrine in a source of administrative law)
administrative law that:
Too basic in administrative law to need citation of
jurisprudence is the rule that jurisdiction and powers of
administrative agencies, like respondent Commission,
are limited to those expressly granted or necessarily
implied from those granted in the legislation creating
such body; and any order without or beyond such
jurisdiction is void and ineffective (Globe Wireless case).

PEOPLE VS TOLEDANO

MECANO VS COA FACTS:


Bunao, while a member of Sangguniang Bayan, entered
FACTS: into a lease contract covering 2 public market stalls. Two
Mecano, an NBI Director, was hospitalized for administrative cases were filed against against him
cholecystitis, for which he incurred medical and violating RA3019 and R6713 with the Ombudsman.
hospitalization expenses, the total amount of which he is However, said cases were dismissed. An information for
21
Administrative Law Case Digests
violation of Sec41(1) in relation to Sec221 of BP337 was petition was just denied by the CA.A petition for review
filed against respondent before the RTC of Iba, Zambales was raised to the SC stressing that one month
which prohibits gov’t officials from engaging in any suspension, as stated in the Ombudsman Act of 1998, is
business transaction with the local government unit. The appealable considering that it is not among those
RTC, upon motion of the accused, dismissed the criminal enumerated as final and unappealable.
case on the ground of the dismissal of the administrative
cases. ISSUE:
Whether or not the provision in R.A. No. 6770, otherwise
HELD: known as the Ombudsman Act of 1998, providing
There is nothing in the law(Art 89RPC) which states that suspension of not more than one month’s salary is final
exoneration from an administrative charge extinguishes and unappealable.
criminal liability. It is a fundamental principle of
administrative law that administrative law that HELD:
administrative cases a independent from criminal Sec. 27 of RA No. 6770 states that: “any order, directive
actions for the same act or omission. RA 7160,LGC of or decision imposing the penalty of public censure,
1991, which replaced BP337 reenacted in its Sec89 the reprimand, suspension of not more than one month’s
legal provision of Sec 41 of BP337.Thus, the act salary shall be final and unappealable…”
committed before the reenactment continuous to be a Salary suspension is an effect of work suspension
crime. following the “no work, no pay” principle. It will be the
employee concerned who will be suspended and such
suspension without pay,being final, and unappealable, is
clearly expressed the law. RA No. 6770, therefore, is a
legal and clear basis of denying the petitioner’s appeal.

RENATO HERRERA VS ELMER BOHOL

FACTS:
Renato F. Herrera, former Director III at DAR Central
Office, approved the request for shift of item number of
Plaridel Elmer J. Bohol, a Senior Agrarian Reform officer
at the BARIE. The shift or item number from 577-1 of
Fund 108 to 562-3 of Fund 101 resulted to Bohol
ontaining his salary under Fund 101. When Bohol was
informed that he could not draw his salary under such
item anymore because his item was recalled and was
given to another person, he charged Herrera before the
Office of the Ombudsman, with Grave Misconduct
and/or Inefficiency and Incompetence. The Ombudsman
found Renato Herrera guilty of simple misconduct and
was suspended for one month without pay. Such
decision was contested by Herrera and he even appealed
to the CA on the ground that he did not fail to take
measures to correct respondent’s recall; but, such
22
Administrative Law Case Digests