Administrative Investigations and Appeals 1. WON petitioners’ appointments were valid – NO.
GR No. 160791 – Sales v. Carreon Jr. a. This is an example of midnight appointments, especially after their
Former Mayor of Dapitan City appointed 83 personnel one month before he had to step
down from his office. The new mayor, the respondent, issued memorandum orders
revoking the 83 appointments. Now, the petitioners are assailing such orders. The CSC
Regional Office found the appointments to be valid, but CSC En banc, CA, and SC found
such to be invalid.
DOCTRINE
Not all midnight appointments are invalid. Each of the appointments must be judged based
on the nature, character, and merits of the individual appointment and circumstances
surrounding the same.
When appointments were madeen masse by the outgoing administration, through hurried
manuveurs, and under circumstances departing from good faith, morality and propriety,
then the Court will stike it down.
CSC has the power to take appropriate action on all appointments, including its authority to
recall appointments made in disregard of the applicable provisions of Civil Service Law
and regulations.
FACTS
1. In the May 2001 elections, then Mayor Joseph Cedrick Ruiz of Dapitan City was
running for re-election, but was defeated by respondent Rodolfo Carreon Jr.
2. During Mayor Ruiz’s last month in office, he issued 83 appointments including the
petitioners in this case.
3. July 1, 2001: Respondent assumed office and issued Memorandum Orders No. 1 and
2, which revoked the 83 appointments because it violated Civil Service Commission
(CSC) Resolution No. 01-988 in relation to CSC Memorandum Circular No. 7, which
disallowed appointments in the civil service during the election period.
a. Respondent prohibited the release of the salaries and benefits of the 83
appointees.
4. One of the petitioners, Patricio Sales, as the president of the Dapitan City
Government Employees Association, requested a ruling from CSC.
a. Respondent submitted a position paper and argued that not only were the
appointments issued in bulk, but there was no urgent need to fill those
positions.
b. CSC Regional Ofiice ruled that the appointments were valid and effective
while respondent’s memorandum orders were null and void.
5. Respondent appealed to the CSC en banc, which the latter reversed the regional
office’s decision because the positions were published and declared vacant prior to
the existence of any vacany.
6. Petitioner appealed to the CA, which the latter dismissed because
a. Petitioners were appointed to positions that reported and published even
before they were declared vacant; and
b. No first level representative to the Personnel Section Board who should
have participated in the screening of candidates.
7. Petitioner is now appealing to the SC.
ISSUE with HOLDING
successors have been proclaimed.
i. It causes not only animosities between the outgoing and the
incoming officials, but also affects efficiency in local governance.
ii. Those appointed would devote their time defending the validity of
their appointment, instead of performing their functions.
b. When appointments were made en masse by the outgoing administration,
through hurried manuveurs, and under circumstances departing from good
faith, morality and propriety, then the Court will stike it down.
c. It is the State policy that opportunities for government employment shall be
open to all qualified citizens and that they be selected based on fitness to
perform the duties and assume the responsibiliites.
i. RA 7041 was enacted to ensure transparency and equal
opportunity in the recruitment and hiring of government personnel.
ii. Under Sections 2 and 3 of the RA 7041, the CSC is required to
publish the lists of vacant positions and such publications shall be
posted by the chief personnel or administrative officer of all LGUs
in the designated places.
1. The vacant position may only be filled after they have
been reported to the CSC as vacant and only after
publication.
iii. In this case
1. The publication of vacancy was made even before the
positions were actually vacant.
2. No first-level representative appointed to the Personnel
Selection Board, which deliberated on the appointments
to first-level positions, which is required by CSC
Memorandum Circular 18.
iv. SC ruled that the petition lacks merit because based on Section
20, Rule VI of the Omnibus Rules Implementing Book V-A of the
Administrative Code providest that even if the appointment was
initially approved, it may be recalled if it violates other existing civil
service laws, rules, and regulations.
v. In deliberating and recommending to Mayor Ruiz, the appoinments
of petitioners without the required representation, the Board
violated the CSC Rules.
d. CSC has the power to take appropriate action on all appointments, including
its authority to recall appointments made in disregard of the applicable
provisions of Civil Service Law and regulations.
.
1