This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION and LORENZO SANGALANG
FACTS: The Governor of Batangas appointed his brother, Benjamin, as Senior Executive Assistant, a non-career service position which belongs to the personal and confidential staff of an elective official. He appointed his again as Acting Provincial Administrator when the incumbent resigned- for alleged lack of qualified applicants and so as not to prejudice the operation of the Provincial Government. Consequently, Jose issued Benjamin Laurel a promotional appointment as Civil Security Officer classified as primarily confidential by PD 868. Respondent assails the appointment saying that: (1) the position in question is a career position, (2) the appointment violates civil service rules, and (3) since the Governor authorized said appointee to receive representation allowance, he violated the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act. The Governor asserts that the appointment did not violate the provision prohibiting nepotism under Section 49 of P.D. No. 807 because both the positions of Senior Executive Assistant and Civil Security Officer, are primarily confidential in nature. Neither was there a violation of P.D. 807 Sec 49 1 because what the latter proscribes is the appointment of a relative to career service position and since Laurel was only designated as Acting Provincial Administrator, the prohibition doesn’t apply. The CSC revoked the designation of Benjamin as Acting Provincial Administrator for being nepotic.for although dubbed a designation, was still illegal because what cannot be done directly cannot be done indirectly. Failing his “designation defense”, he now insists that the duties, functions and responsibilities of the Provincial Administrator make them primarily confidential in nature. The SolGen argues that the doctrines in the cases cited by Laurel were already superseded by PD 807, Sec 6 and PD 868 which repealed any provision of law authorizing any official, other than the President, to declare positions policydetermining, primarily confidential or highly technical ISSUES: 1. WON Benjamin can be validly appointed to the position of Provincial Administrator, the latter being a primarily confidential position. 2.WON the rule on nepotism applies to designation 3. WON the doctrines in Pinero and Salazar were superseded by PD 868 HELD: 1. No 2. Yes 3. No RATIO: 1. If the position is primarily confidential, the prohibition in PD 807 will not apply. Firstly, it must be noted that the prior admission of the petitioner to the position being a career position amounts to estoppel. Even barring estoppel, the position cannot be claimed as primarily confidential. Benjamin cannot be appointed. The position of Provincial Administrator is embraced within the Career Service under Section 5 2 of P.D. No. 807 as
SECTION 49. Nepotism. — (a) All appointments in the national, provincial, city and municipal governments or in any branch or instrumentality thereof, including government-owned or controlled corporations, made in favor of a relative of the appointing or recommending authority, or of the chief of the bureau or office, or of the persons exercising immediate supervision over him, are hereby prohibited. As used in this Section, the word "relative" and members of the family referred to are those related within the third degree either of consanguinity or affinity. (b) The following are exempted from the operation of the rules on nepotism: (1) persons employed in a confidential capacity, (2) teachers, (3) physicians, and (4) members of the Armed Forces of the Philippines
Education : Bachelor's degree preferably in Law/Public or Business Administration.
Experience : Six years of progressively responsible experience in planning, directing and administration of provincial government operations. Experience in private agencies considered are those that have been more or less familiar level
evidenced by the qualifications prescribed for it in the Manual of Position Descriptions. A rule that exclusively vests upon the Executive the power to declare what position may be considered policy-determining. CSC. Reading this section with Section 25 of said decree. it is an open career position. He was thereafter promoted as Civil Security Officer.D. HONORABLE SIMPLICIO C. Another obstacle to Benjamin’s appointment as Provincial Administrator is contained in Section 24(f) of R. responsible for the overall coordination of the activities of the various national and local agencies in the province.. then the prohibition on nepotism would be meaningless and toothless. also a primarily confidential position.D. administrative and organizational work in the operation of provincial government with highly complex.A. DEMAISIP. Eligibility : RA 1080 (BAR)/Personnel Management Officer/Career Service (Professional)/First Grade/Supervisor). No. SIXTO P. Designation is also defined as "an appointment or assignment. career service positions may be filled up only by appointment.D. DISTINGUISHING CHARACTERISTICS: This is the class for top professional level management. highly technical or primarily confidential latter merely refers to the initial determination of the Executive. and general planning. hence a designation of a person to fill it up because it is vacant. either permanent or temporary. which in no case forecloses judicial review. 2260 which provides that no person appointed to a position in the non-competitive service (now non-career) shall perform the duties properly belonging to any position in the competitive service (now career service). or highly technical would subvert the provision on the civil service. is necessarily included in the term appointment. CIRILO GELVEZON. As such. Judging from the above-cited description. MANUEL B. DEFINITION: Under the direction of the Provincial Governor. or based on highly technical qualifications. No. a relative within the prohibited degree to a vacant position in the career service. for appointment to it requires prior qualification in an appropriate examination. (b) opportunity for advancement to higher career positions. is characterized by (a) entrance based on merit and fitness to be determined as far as practicable by competitive examinations. 2. Both positions belong to the non-career service under Section 6 of P. TRAVIÑA and MANUEL M. 807 does not suggest that designation should be differentiated from appointment. PD 868 vesting in the President the exclusive authority to declare a position policy-determining. AGUADERA. of administrative proficiency. At the time he was designated as Acting Provincial Administrator.”Section 49 of P. CASUMPANG vs. and not appointing. Moreover. More specifically. he was holding the position of Senior Executive Assistant in the Office of the Governor. 807. 807. the position is in the career service which. . SANTOS B. a primarily confidential position. for it precisely accomplishes the same purpose. it cannot be a primarily confidential position. primarily confidential. 3. Any appointing authority may circumvent it by merely designating. TEOTIMO ARANDELA. and (c) security of tenure. GRIÑO. if a designation is not to be deemed included in the term appointment under Section 49 of P. No. direction and control of the personnel functions and the administrative services of the Governor's Office. involved relationships with considerable delegation of authority and responsibility and a high degree of public contact. No.
5185 which categorized them as positions of "trust". 7 The personal character of the relationship prohibits its delegation in favor of another attorney without the client's consent. Senior Legal Officer Teotimo Arandela as promoted to Provincial Attorney. Since the positions occupied by these subordinates are remote from that of the appointing authority. ISSUE: 1. The CSC denied their MR." Cadiente vs. 5185. At this level. is one that depends on the highest degree of trust for the counsel selected. irrespective of whether the client is a private person or a government functionary. For this purpose the functions hitherto performed by the provincial and city fiscals in serving as legal adviser and legal officer for civil cases of the province and city shall be transferred to the provincial attorney and city legal officer. can be delegated. Upon the latter’s recommendation. However. 2. A city legal officer appointed by the mayor to work for the city has for its counterpart in the province a provincial attorney appointed by the governor. whether a private individual or a public officer. Creation of positions of Provincial Attorney and City Legal officer. falling under the category of permanent employees. 19. Their services are precisely categorized by law to be "trusted services. 2.. Occupants of such positions would be considered confidential employees if the predominant reason they were chosen by the appointing authority is the belief that he can share a close intimate relationship with the occupant which measures freedom of discussion. Hence the petition to the SC. on the other hand. WON the position of a provincial attorney is primarily confidential in nature so that his services of can be terminated upon loss of confidence 2.A.TEODULFO DATO-ON. impairment of the appointing power’s interests thru the acts of the lower in rank may be prevented by the confidential employee. There is no need to extend the professional relationship to the legal staff who assist the confidential employer. They have been employed due to their technical qualifications. Santos held that the position of a City Legal Officer is one requiring that utmost confidence on the part of the mayor. so they are permanent employees. both the provincial attorney and city legal officer serve as the legal adviser and legal officer for the civil cases of the province and the city that they work for. The newly-elected Governor Grino however terminated the services of Arandela. Respondents argue that the CSC had already classified the questioned positions as career positions. The relationship existing between a lawyer and his client. By virtue of R. J. with security 3 Sec. — To enable the provincial and city governments to avail themselves of the full time and trusted services of legal officers. Their positions are highly technical in character and not confidential. WON the position of the legal subordinates are confidential in nature HELD: 1. . Petitioner Demaisip was reappointed by Governor Griño as the Provincial Attorney. was promoted from Legal Officer II to Senior Legal Officer. Respondent Cirilo Gelvezon. No RATIO: 1. concurring and dissenting: I concur with the majority opinion in its classification of the positions of legal assistants or subordinates of the Provincial Attorney as highly technical in character. The attorney-client relationship is strictly personal because it involves mutual trust and confidence of the highest degree. without fear of embarrassment or misgivings of possible betrayal of personal trust on confidential matters of state. the legal work involved. the positions of provincial attorney and city legal officer may be created and such officials shall be appointed in such manner as is provided for under Section four of this Act. as distinguished from the relationship. Gelvezon. Dato-on and Geduspan in relation to an article pertaining to the Iloilo office of the Provincial Attorney which appeared in the Panay News and which and which undermined that trust and confidence" that he reposed on them ". The positions of city legal officer and provincial attorney were created under Sec 193 of Republic Act No. Teodolfo Datoon and Nelson Geduspan. PADILLA. and they belong to the category of classified employees under the Civil Service Law. It is possible to distinguish between positions lawyers in confidential and non-confidential positions by looking at the proximity of to that of the appointing authority.Yes. Cirilo Gelvezon. With respect to the legal assistants or subordinates of the provincial attorney namely. respectively. and NELSON GEDUSPAN FACTS: Sixto Demaisip was the Provincial Attorney of Iloilo. The respondents appealed to the Merit Systems Protection Board of the CSC which declared their termination illegal and ordered their reinstatement. the Cadiente and Besa rulings cannot apply. Respondents Teodolfo Dato-on and Nelson Geduspan were appointed to the position of Legal Officer II. the element of trust between them is no longer predominant.
from the majority opinion in its treatment of the position of Provincial Attorney. as can be gleaned from the Local Government Code. As a provincial public officer. SARMIENTO. SALAS FACTS: Salas was appointed by the PAGCOR Chairman as Internal Security Staff (ISS) member and assigned to the . concurring & dissenting: I can not agree with the second part of the decision when it refused to apply the same aforementioned ruling to the case of legal assistants or subordinate lawyers on the justification that the earlier cases of Cadiente and Besa only specifically dealt with the positions of city legal officer and PNB chief legal counsel.of tenure under the civil service system. Both should be primarily confidential. and not to the elected Governor. the function of an assistant or a subordinate legal officer. Anent the claim that the positions of assistant legal officers or subordinate lawyers is highly technical and not confidential. or other misconduct but not for the Governor's loss of confidence in him. this contention is not supported by any evidence on record or any basis in law. the said local public officer is an employee of the provincial government to which he owes his loyalty.. removal or transfer is subject to the provisions of the civil service law. respectively. He may be removed from office for incompetence. and that the positions of legal assistants or subordinate lawyers are highly technical in character and not confidential. however. J." Absent any showing of substantial distinctions between the nature of the work or function of the provincial attorney and that of the legal assistants or subordinate lawyers. RAFAEL M. for he is not part of the latter's personal or confidential staff. rules and regulations. I dissent. CSC and PAGCOR vs. is to "assist the chief officer and perform such duties as the latter may assign him. Although the power to appoint the Provincial Attorney is vested in the Governor. Abuse of power in the termination and/or suspension of an appointee to the position of Provincial Attorney or of a similar position on the basis of "loss of confidence" which is not duly substantiated should not be allowed. it is logical to presume that both public officers handle confidential matters relating to the legal aspect of provincial administration and that their relationship with their appointing power is that of a lawyer and his client requiring utmost confidence and the highest degree of trust. On the contrary. the Provincial Attorney's suspension. dishonesty. however.
whether technical. The CA however reversed the mentioned rulings and adjudged Salas to not be a confidential employee after applying the “proximity rule”." The matter should be left to the "proper implementation of the laws. (2) PAGCOR vs. Petitioners raise 4 grounds: (1) Sec 16.of the old Constitutions. The case of PAGCOR vs. The words “in nature” is used in Section 2. and if the position is "highly confidential" then the President and the CSC Commissioner must implement the law. depending upon the nature of the position to be filled". Appeals to the MPSB and CSC were denied saying that being a confidential employee by operation of law (PD1869) his term only in fact expired upon loss of confidence by the appointing power." There were two instances when a position may be considered primarily confidential: First. documentation or suppression of any unwanted incidents at the gaming and non-gaming areas etc do not involve "such close intimacy" between him and the appointing authority – the Chairman of PAGCOR.casino at the Manila Pavilion Hotel. . 2260 and Section 1 of the General Rules in the implementing rules of P. as would insure "freedom from misgivings of betrayals of personal trust. prevention. administrative. Section 5 of Republic Act No. second. Proximity Rule Where the position occupied is remote from that of the appointing authority. and. At first glance. can be no more than initial determinations that are not conclusive in case of conflict. when the President. the Pinero doctrine still applies. a member of the PACGOR’s Internal Security Staff is a confidential employee HELD: No RATIO: "Section 164 of PD 1869 insofar as it exempts PAGCOR positions from the provisions of Civil Service Law and Rules has been modified by the 1987 Constitution and EO 292. which was denied. PD. “In Nature” The Court explicitly decreed that executive pronouncements. report unusual incidents and related observations in accordance with established procedures. His employment was terminated by the PAGCOR Board for loss of confidence.D. Article XII. which provides that "all employees of the casino and related services shall be classified as 'confidential' appointees. upon recommendation of the CSC Commissioner has declared the position to be primarily confidential. such as Presidential Decree No. All employees of the casinos and related services shall be classified as "confidential" appointees. Salas requested reinvestigation from the PACGOR Board. illegal transactions and other anomalous activities. sometimes. CA upheld the dismissal of PAGCOR employees declared to be confidential simply because the validity of the PD 1869 was not questioned therein. Despite the deletion of the phrase “in nature” in the 1987 Constitution and the RAC. it would seem that the instant case falls under the first category by virtue of the express mandate under Section 16 of Presidential Decree No. and (4) His functions as a member of the ISS ISSUE: WON Salas. it is the nature of the position that determines whether it is policy-determining or primarily confidential. private respondent may handle ordinarily "confidential matters" or papers which are somewhat confidential in nature does not suffice to characterize his position as primarily confidential. after a covert investigation yielded an alleged involvement of Salas in proxy betting. the same cannot be said with respect to the last portion of Section 16. and shall be governed only by the personnel management policies set by the Board of Directors. According to the transcripts in the passage of the bill. which classified PAGCOR employees as confidential appointees. 807. 1869. Court of Appeals. the element of trust between them is no longer predominant. when by the nature of the functions of the office there exists "close intimacy" between the appointee and appointing power which insures freedom of intercourse without embarrassment or freedom from misgivings of betrayals of personal trust or confidential matters of state. However. merely exempts the position from the civil service eligibility requirement. The CSC itself ascribes to this view as may be gleaned from its resolution which stated that "the declaration of a position as primarily confidential if at all. (3) CSC Resolution No. albeit requiring honesty and integrity in their exercise. misbehavior. 1869 creating the PACGOR expressly provides that all employees of the casinos and related services shall be classified as confidential appointees. The functions of Salas: to prevent irregularities. The fact that. professional or managerial are exempt from the provisions of the Civil Service Law. as can be gleaned from the deliberations by the Constitutional Commission. 4 All positions in the corporation. 1869. rules and regulations. et al. 91-830 declared employees in casinos and related service as confidential appointees by operation of law.
ISS members do not directly report to the Office of the Chairman in the performance of their official duties. I should like to bring into focus the phrase. GABRIEL C. An ISS member is subject to the control and supervision of an Area Supervisor who." JESUS ARMANDO TARROSA vs. The latter is himself answerable to the Chairman and the Board of Directors. ENRIQUEZ III FACTS: Respondent Singson was appointed Governor of the Bangko Sentral by President Fidel V. 1993. VITUG. Regalado supporting the theory of the appellate court that Salas. in turn. Justice Florenz D. whereas the highest level is Pay Class 12. The position of an ISS member belongs to the bottom level of the salary scale of the corporation. nevertheless.Although appointed by the Chairman. only implements the directives of the Branch Chief Security Officer.. SALVADOR M. Ramos on July 2. SINGSON and HON. The petition seeks to enjoin respondent Singson from the performance of his functions as such official until his appointment is confirmed by the Commission . "without prejudice to the filing of administrative charges against Salas if warranted. being in Pay Class 2 level only. may not dismissed for mere lack of trust or confidence. not being a confidential employee. effective on July 6. Petitioner filed a petition for quo warranto. concurring: I agree with the thorough and exhaustive ponencia of Mr. 1993. J.
I would anchor said dismissal squarely on the ruling laid down by the Court in Calderon vs. 432 (1903). brought by someone who does not claim to be the one entitled to occupy the said office.A.” Respondents allege that the Congress exceeded its legislative power in requiring COA confirmation of the BSP Governor.Y.on Appointments and respondent Salvador M. it called attention to the ruling in Calderon vs. Carale that Congress cannot by law expand the confirmation powers of COA and require confirmation of appointment of other government officials not mentioned in the first sentence of Section 16 of Article VII of the Constitution. Instead. such position consequently categorized as Director III. Petitioner was temporarily designated as Acting District Collector. its budgetary requirements are not subject to the provisions of the General Appropriations Act. Enriquez. RATIO: Such a special civil action can only be commenced by the Solicitor General or by a person claiming to be entitled to a public office or position unlawfully held or exercised by another and since Tarrosa is not lawfully entitled to the same. They also aver that the Bangko Sentral has its own budget and accordingly. No. of basing the petition's dismissal mainly on technicality. Carale PEDRO MENDOZA vs. Secretary of Budget and Management. 7653.E. 7653. 67 N. J. from disbursing public funds in payment of the salaries and emoluments of respondent Singson. establishing the Bangko Sentral as the Central Monetary Authority of the Philippines which provides that “the Governor of the Bangko Sentral shall be head of a department and his appointment shall be subject to confirmation by the Commission on Appointments.A. may not be determined in a suit to restrain the payment of salary to the person holding such office. 910. the latter not being among those enumerated in Section 16 of Article VII of the Constitution. The petition is anchored on the provisions of Section 6 of R. ISSUE: WON a petition for quo warranto is the proper remedy by a taxpayer to seek ouster of Singson HELD: No. In Greene v. He held various positions until he was appointed as Customs Servcie Chief of the Customs Intelligence and Investigation Service in 1989. Collection District . 175 N. concurring: I concur in the result. he cannot avail of the said remedy.. RAY ALLAS and GODOFREDO OLORES FACTS: Petitioner Mendoza joined the Bureau of Customs in 1972. it was held that the question of title to an office. however. To uphold the action would encourage every disgruntled citizen to resort to the courts. thereby causing incalculable mischief and hindrance to the efficient operation of the governmental machinery While the Court refused to rule on the Constitutionality of R. CIIS. which must be resolved in a quo warranto proceeding. Knox. PADILLA.
Mendoza filed a petition for quo warranto against Salas which was granted by the RTC finding that 1) the petitioner was illegally terminated and deemed not to have vacated his office. It may also be instituted by an individual in his own name who claims to be entitled to the public office or position usurped or unlawfully held or exercised by another. While the appeal by Allas was pending. This rule.THE CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION and PNB FACTS: Conchita Romualdez-Yap started working with the PNB on 20 September 1972 as special assistant with the rank of Second Assistant Manager assigned to the office of the PNB President. Mendoza asked for an execution of the decision but the Court denied it due to the fact that Godofredo Olores. A judgment against a public officer in regard to a public right binds his successor in office. This follows from the nature of the writ of quo warranto itself. RATIO: Under Rule 66. ISSUE: WON the favorable ruling in the quo warranto proceeding can be executed against the subsequent appointee to the office who was not party thereto HELD: No. In the present case. respondent Ray Allas was appointed as "Acting Director III" of the CIIS. Allas was appointed by President Ramos as Director II of CIIS. After several promotions. The character of the judgment to be rendered in quo warranto rests to some extent in the discretion of the court and on the relief sought. In his place. he claims that the nullity of Allas’ appointment extended to his successor Olores. is not applicable in quo warranto cases. A judgment in quo warranto does not bind the respondent's successor in office. a petition for quo warranto is a proceeding to determine the right of a person to the use or exercise of a franchise or office and to oust the holder from its enjoyment. Quo warranto is a demand made by the state upon some individual or corporation to show by what right they exercise some franchise or privilege appertaining to the state which. if his claim is not well-founded. It was dismissed.X. the position previously held by Mendoza while the latter was altogether terminated from the Bureau of Customs. the court found that Allas usurped the position of Director II and ordered that Allas be ousted from the position and Mendoza reinstated to the same. who was not party to the quo warranto proceeding was already holding the contested position. they cannot legally exercise except by virtue of a grant or authority from the state. CONCHITA ROMUALDEZ-YAP vs. In other words. . causing Mendoza to ask for the dismissal of the appeal since the issue had become moot. It is never directed to an officer as such. He alleges that he should have been reinstated despite respondent Olores' appointment because the subject position was never vacant to begin with. however. or if he has forfeited his right to enjoy the privilege. Where the action is filed by a private person. even though such successor may trace his title to the same source. 2) the appointment of Salas was void ab initio. she was appointed in 1983 as Senior Vice President assigned to the Fund Transfer Department. he must prove that he is entitled to the controverted position. President Ramos appointed him to the position of Deputy Commissioner of Customs for Assessment and Operations. but always against the person — to determine whether he is constitutionally and legally authorized to perform any act in. according to the Constitution and laws of the land. or exercise any function of the office to which he lays claim. Furthermore. It may be commenced for the Government by the Solicitor general against individuals who usuro public office. otherwise respondent has a right to the undisturbed possession of the office. Cagayan de Oro City.
3. PANIS vs. jura subveniunt (Laws come to the assistance of the vigilant. PNB's reorganization. The foregoing rebut the allegation of bad faith. At the time of reorganization. ISSUES: 1. VELOSO FACTS: The CCMC. etc. the action is one for quo warranto which prescribes after 1 year from the ouster. Pursuant to the reorganization plan. Executive Order No. Mison. 3. The prayer in the petition at bar seeks petitioner's immediate reinstatement to her former position as senior vice president and head of the Fund Transfer Department. 80 (Revised Charter of the PNB) was approved authorizing the reorganization and rehabilitation of PNB. reorganizations are regarded as valid provided they are pursued in good faith. positions and functions were abolished or merged. Conchita was notified of her separation from service thru a letter. WON there was bad faith on the PNB’s part 2. under the bank's new staffing pattern. was by virtue of a valid law. CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION and BELLA V. under the bank's new staffing pattern. since it is not proper that the title to a public office be subjected to continued with uncertainty. Yes RATIO: 1&2 As held in Dario vs. or reappointment to a position of comparable or equivalent rank without loss of seniority rights and pay. WON the 1 year prescriptive period for quo warranto proceedings should apply in this case.Petitioner filed several applications for leave of absence which were duly approved. the Fund Transfer Department was abolished and its functions transferred to the International Department. was a management prerogative exercised pursuant to a business judgment. While she was on leave. An exception to this prescriptive period lies only if the failure to file the action can be attributed to the acts of a responsible government officer and not of the dismissed employee. considering that she had abandoned or showed lack of interest in reclaiming the same position when the bank was not yet fully rehabilitated and she only insisted on reinstatement in August 1989 or two (2) years after her alleged unjustified separation. An action for quo warranto should be brought within one (1) year after ouster from office.. while private respondent was . No 3. Vigilantibus. Petitioner was employed as Administrative Officer of the Hospital. a reorganization is carried out in "good faith" if it is for the purpose of economy or to make bureaucracy more efficient. or reappointment to a position of comparable or equivalent rank without loss of seniority rights and pay. This. WON the doctrine in Dario vs. The abolition of the Fund Transfer Department (FTD) was deemed necessary. She claims that the action is one for separation from service without just cause with a prescriptive period of 4 years under Article 1146 of the Civil Code and that there is no claim of usurpation. departments. Mison was incorrectly applied. Conchita seeks immediate reinstatement to her former position as senior vice president and head of the Fund Transfer Department. PETITION DISMISSED. As a general rule. JAIME T. is operated and maintained by the local government of Cebu City. The failure to institute the same within the reglementary period constitutes more than a sufficient basis for its dismissal . This is not the unjustifiable cause whichresults in injury to the rights of a person contemplated by Article 1146.. Based on her allegations. due to the critical financial situation of the bank. not of the sleeping) Restoring petitioner to her previous position with backwages would be unjust enrichment to her. to the Court's mind. Hence the petition. She appealed to the CSC which upheld her separation. This cannot be upheld because her separation from service was due to the abolition of her office in implementation of a valid reorganization. to repeat. HELD: 1. non dormientibus. formerly known as the Cebu City Hospital. No 2. etc.
but not necessarily in this order. JR. Ordinance No. HON. the designation thereof was merely corrected to reflect the proper classification of the position under existing rules. 1216. granted such powers as were deemed in line with the objectives of the Ordinance. DIVINAGRACIA. and appointment of outsiders who have appropriate civil service eligibility. WON Veloso was validly appointed to the position taking into consideration qualifications HELD: 1. 1216 amending the Charter of Cebu changed the name of the hospital to CCMC and under such ordinance. The position of Assistant Chief of Hospital for Administration is the very same position of Hospital Administrator created by Ordinance No. even. What the Civil Service Law and the Administrative Code of 1987 provide is that if a vacancy is filled up by the promotion. and (3) the seniority and next-in-rank rules were disregarded. Ordinance No. Camarines Sur. STO. NACARIO FACTS: Mancita was appointed Municipal Development Coordinator (MDC) of Pili. Besides. the person holding the position next in rank thereto "shall be considered for promotion. ISSUES.. to which position. Both candidates possess the minimum qualifications for the position. This case however involves a new office and a position created in the course of a valid reorganization. PATRICIA A. but it does nor necessarily follow that he alone and no one else can be appointed. One who is "next in rank" to a vacancy is given preferential consideration for promotion to the vacant position. then Municipal Budget Officer Prescilla B. (2) assuming that it was. Panis protested the appointment which was however denied at all levels. The "next in rank" rule specifically applies only in cases of promotion. there was no qualification standard nor valid screening procedure. It cannot be said that private respondent was an outsider. a vacancy not filled by promotion may be filled by transfer of present employees in the government service. whether to a vacancy or to a newly created position. Yes 2. the office was renamed as Municipal Planning and Development Coordinator. and PRESCILLA B. the law does not prohibit the employment of persons from the private sector so long as they have the appropriate civil service eligibility. DELFIN N. The Office of Hospital Administrator was not extinguished. in a permanent capacity. The concept of "next in rank" does not impose any mandatory or peremptory requirement to appoint the person occupying the next lower position in the occupational group of the office. TOMAS. by reinstatement. if she was an outsider. RAMON P. 1. the City Mayor appointed respondent Veloso as of Assistant Chief of Hospital for Administration. When the old LGC took effect in 1983. sufficient discretion. The determination of among the qualified candidates should be preferred belongs to the appointing authority. Once a candidate possesses the minimum qualities required by law. if not plenary. This classification was subsequently approved by the Department of Budget Management. whom to appoint among those qualified is an administrative question involving considerations of wisdom for the best interest of the service which only the appointing authority can decide. There is no vested right granted the next in rank nor a ministerial duty imposed on the appointing authority to promote the holder to the vacant position An appointment.Administrative Officer of the City Health Department detailed at the said hospital. JR. WON the office was validly created 2. The title of Hospital Administrator was later found to be a misnomer and thus was properly classified by the Joint Commission on Local Government Personnel Administration as one of Assistant Chief of Hospital for Administration. Nacario was appointed and Mancita . Yes RATIO: 1. ERENETA. 2. is essentially within the discretionary power of whomsoever it is vested. Under the law. by reemployment of those separated from the service. AND ALEXIS D. Although directly employed by the City Health Department.. SAN LUIS vs. is granted to the appointing authority. Panis assails this appointment saying that: 1) 1) the position of Assistant Chief of Hospital for Administration was not legally created. 1216 for the purpose of correcting the deficiencies and improving the performance of said institution amending the Charter of Cebu provided for an Office of Hospital Administrator. she actually worked at the CCMC prior to her appointment to the subject position.
CSC held that the reinstatement of Mancita was not a valid cause for the removal of Nacario. without prejudice to San Luis' right to be reinstated to his former position as Cashier II of the DENR. San Luis should relinquish his position in favor of private respondent Nacario. Omnibus Rules Implementing Book V of E. according to her.. and 3rd the CSC disapproves the appointment of a person proposed to a higher position. That would constitute removal from office. in which case.O. The movement of Nacario from the Budget Office to the Office of MPDC cannot be considered a promotion for the term connotes an increase in duties and responsibilities as well as a corresponding increase in salary.O. A transfer is a "movement from one position to another which is of equivalent rank. No permanent transfer can take place unless the officer or employee is first removed from the position held. 3. he may appeal his case to the commission. When Nacario was extended a permanent appointment and she assumed the position. On appeal to the MPSB. 13 do not avail in the case. invalid as it is anathema to security of tenure. of course. Rule VII. she applied for the position of Budget Officer with the Department of Budget and Management while she was MPDC indicating that she did not abandon or relinquish her former position. which when translated means "Provided that the separation of the former incumbent is in order. J. WON Sec 13 Rule VI of the IRR of Bk 5 EO 232 is applicable 2. she acquired a legal. ISSUES: 1. the employee concerned shall be informed of the reasons therefor. not merely an equitable right. The appointment of San Luis is is with a condition: Sa kondisyon nasa ayos ang pagkakatiwalag sa tungkulin ng dating nanunungkulan. dissenting: It is private respondent Prescilla B. level and salary.relieved from service by Gov. Sec. advancement or reduction or a transfer that aims to "lure the employee away from his permanent position. In fact. As a result of the denial. The local Budget Office. DAVIDE. was nationalized and placed under the DBMand Alexis D. The principle of estoppel cannot bar her from returning to her former position because of the fact that she reluctantly accepted the second office. The unconsented lateral transfer of Nacario from the Budget Office to the Office of MPDC was arbitrary. 5. Mancita received judgment ordering her reinstatement after finding her removal to be illegal. 2. Private respondent claims that she did not voluntarily apply for transfer from the Budget Office to the Office of MPDC but was constrained to "accept" the new position because of her deference to then Mayor Prila. The decision was appealed by Divinagracia to the CSC but was denied.. he being also a permanent appointee equally guaranteed security of tenure. Such right to security of tenure is protected not only by statute. Prila. except for cause. 292 provides that transfer shall not be considered disciplinary when made in the interest of public service. San Luis was temporarily appointed Municipal Budget Officer of Pili by DBM Secretary Carague and was subsequently appointed to said position in a permanent capacity. but also by the Constitution and cannot be taken away from her either by removal. It was movement of a lateral transfer. A transfer that results in promotion or demotion. amounting to removal without cause. Sto Tomas denied a request for reconsideration by Divinagracia. It could not be said that Nacario vacated her former position as Budget Officer or abdicated her right to hold the office when she accepted the position of MPDC." Considering that the separation of Nacario who was the former incumbent was not in order. 2nd all appointments are simultaneously submitted to the CSC for approval. 2. 13 of the Omnibus Rules Implementing Book V of E. Sec. transfer or by revocation of appointment. and is usually accompanied by an increase in salary". Divinagracia. Nacario who should bear the prejudicial consequence of the reinstatement of . Nacario was terminated from office in order to effect the reinstatement of Mancita. 292 has the ff requisites: 1 st: before a public official or employee can be automatically restored to her former position. and after prior notice. If the employee believes that there is no justification for the transfer. without break in service. there must first be a series of promotions. WON the lateral transfer of Nacario was validly made HELD: 1. No. No RATIO: 1. Jr." cannot be done without the employees' consent. and since she was the former Municipal Budget Officer she had the right to return to that position. Mayor of Pili. par. The essential requisites under Sec. and then appointed to another position. This is." Promotion is the "advancement from one position to another with an increase in duties and responsibilities as authorized by law. by petitioner Delfin N.
even peacefully. as well. NARCISO Y. JOSE FACTS: Santiago held the position of Customs Collector before he was extended a permanent promotional appointment by then Customs Commissioner Wigberto Tanada to the rank of Customs Collector III. Nacario must further be barred on the ground of estoppel. She held the new position continuously and uninterruptedly. fully aware of the fact that several persons had succeeded her as MBO. From the foregoing facts. as well.Filomena R. As earlier stated. Nacario merely sent to the CSC a letter-query during the pendency of Mancita's petition in this Court. It should be noted that there was no reception of evidence before the CSC. at the earliest. it is clear that private respondent Nacario voluntarily accepted her appointment as MPDC. Leonardo Jose . She was. thereby effectively relinquishing and abandoning her position as MBO. Mancita to the position of Municipal Planning and Development Coordinator (MPDC). SANTIAGO vs. 15 October 1990 when she was told to vacate it to comply with the decision of the MSPB reinstating Mancita. CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION and LEONARDO A. until. I find. the conclusion in the majority opinion that her transfer to the position of MPDC was an "unconsented lateral transfer" to be without factual basis.
CSC Resolution No. and meets the other conditions for promotion shall be promoted to the higher position when it becomes vacant. to positions in the civil service and disapprove those where the appointees do not possess the appropriate eligibility or required qualification. which constituted a first in the history of this Bureau. the appointing authority may promote an employee who is not next-in-rank but who possesses superior qualifications and competence compared to a next-in-rank employee who merely meets the minimum requirements for the position. The power to appoint is a matter of discretion. CSC and FLORENTINA E. CSC and FLORENTINA E. The appointing power has a wide latitude of choice as to who is best qualified for the position. The Commission is empowered to approve all appointments.rank position who is deemed the most competent and qualified. if qualified. What it does provide is that they would be among the first to be considered for the vacancy. However. and if the vacancy is not filled by promotion. To apply the next-in-rank rule peremptorily would impose a rigid formula on the appointing power contrary to the policy of the law that among those qualified and eligible. Abila was appointed by . On the other hand. Civil Service Commission it was held that there is "no mandatory nor peremptory requirement in the (Civil Service Law) that persons next-in-rank are entitled to preference in appointment. ISSUE: WON Jose being next-in-rank should be appointed to the contested position HELD: NO RATIO: In Taduran vs. The CSC invoked its power to enforce the merit system under the Constitution and held Jose to be better qualified for his educational attainment.343 Sec 4 provides An employee who holds a next-in. (2) the protestee is competent and qualified for the position (3) existing law and jurisprudence give wide latitude of discretion to the appointing authority. and holding as he does by permanent appointment a position which is higher in rank and salary range.R. not only in the official files. Tanada justified the appointment he made by comparing the credentials and work experience of the two.opposed the appointment before the MPSBsaying that he was next-in-rank. The rule neither grants a vested right to the holder nor imposes a ministerial duty on the appointing authority to promote such person to the next higher position. However. relevant seminars and training courses taken. While Jose was a Customs cCollector. whether original or promotional. civil service eligibilities. ELERIA G. 92573 ALEX A. it has no authority to revoke the said appointment simply because it believed that the private respondent was better qualified for that would have constituted an encroachment on the discretion vested solely in the appointing authority. the same shall be filled by transfer or other modes of appointment. but also in the media. Hence the petition by Santiago. the latest citation commends the Protestee for his pivotal role in the seizure and forfeiture of an ocean-going vessel upheld by the Supreme Court. possesses an appropriate civil service eligibility. ELERIA FACTS: When the incumbent Administrative IV Officer of the Health Department retired. 92867 QUEZON CITY vs. particularly investigation and prosecution.R. being a Customs Collector II. MPSB referred the protest to Tanada who upheld the appointment saying that: (1) the next-in-rank rule is no longer mandatory. the appointing authority is granted discretion and prerogative of choice of the one he deems fit for appointment. No. after the February revolution. More specifically. for exemplary performance of official duties. One who is next-in-rank is entitled to preferential consideration for promotion to the higher vacancy but it does not necessarily follow that he and no one else can be appointed. The MPSB however ruled differently and revoked the appointment of Santiago. "all the commission is actually allowed to do is check whether or not the appointee possesses the appropriate civil service eligibility or the required qualifications. directing that Jose be appointed in his stead. ABILA vs. the Protestee was immediately designated by the undersigned as Chief of a task force which has been credited with the seizure of millions of pesos worth of smuggled shipments. there was no official record of activity recommending him for promotion. Protestee has been the recipient of citations awarded by the Customs Commissioner for the two consecutive years 1984 and 1985. Each one was duly recorded. No." G. 83.
possesses an appropriate civil service eligibility and meets the other conditions for promotion shall be promoted to the higher position. who are competent and qualified and with appropriate civil service eligibility shall be considered for appointment to the vacancy. An employee who holds a next in rank position who is competent and qualified. Pursuant to E. Before that. A promotion involves a situation quite different from the situation in the case at bar where the appointment of petitioner Abila was effected through lateral transfer from a position in one department of the city government to a position of greater responsibility in another department of the same government. AMPARO DELLOSA. Having made the determination. the person holding the position next in rank thereto "shall be considered for promotion. 807 provides is that if a vacancy is filled by a promotion. the CSC may not act any further except to affirm the validity of petitioner's appointment. ROSALINDA JURIA and MARITA BURDEOS FACTS: Petitioner Ardeliza Medenilla was a contractual employee of the DPWH occupying the position of PRO II.QC OIC Brigido Simon to the position. CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION.O. the employees in the department who occupy the next lower positions in the occupational group under which the vacant position is classified. The next-in-rank rule invoked by respondent Commission applies only where a vacancy is filled by promotion. He was detailed as Technical Assistant in the Office of Secretary for Administration and Manpower Management . seeking annulment of respondent Commission's resolution and upholding the validity of the appointment of petitioner Abila." In the case at bar. The Board sustained Eleria for 1) having higher rank and better experience than Santiago.” Sec 4 of CSC Resolution 83-3435 was superseded by Section 2 of Rule 3 of the respondent Commission's subsequent Resolution No. respondents have not asserted the existence of any circumstances which would have warranted intervention by the Commission to correct an arbitrary and merely capricious exercise of power by the appointing authority.WON the next-in-rank rule principle applies in this case HELD: 1. The City Government of QC filed an identical petition. the Commission's acts in this respect constituted an encroachment upon a discretionary authority vested by law in the Quezon City Mayor. ISSUES: 1. 124.. transfer of present employees. 89-779 providing that when a vacancy occurs in the second level of the career service as herein defined. a process which denotes a scalar ascent of an officer to another position higher either in rank or salary. Hence the petition.revoking Abila’s appointment and directing the Mayor to appoint Santiago. 2. religious or blood ties totally against the very purpose behind the establishment of professionalism in the civil service. He was appointed to the position of Supervising Human Resource Development Officer. Also. a reorganization ensued within the DPWH and all the positions were abolished. reinstatement and re-employment or appointment of outsiders who have the necessary eligibility. when it becomes vacant. Edralin 13 which it cites. Abila occupied the positions of Acting Assistant Civil Security Officer. No. CSC will find no comfort in Meram v. the Court affirmed the appointment of the next in rank "because the original appointee's appointment was made in consideration of the political.WON CSC has authority to substitute its own judgment for that of the official authorized by law to make an appointment 2. No. No. (Emphasis supplied) . Abila appealed to the CSC but the latter affirmed the MPSB’s ruling. even if the vacancy here had been filled by promotion rather than by lateral transfer. What Section 19 (3) of P. 5 Section 4. The CSC had no authority to revoke petitioner's appointment because it believed Eleria to be better qualified for the position. Administrative Officer III filed a protest with MPSB which the latter decided in Eleria’s favor. RATIO: 1. In that case. the concept of "next in rank" is not mandatory or peremptory. A vacant position in the Civil Service may be filled by promotion. Civil Intelligence and Security Department of the Quezon City Government. 2. The CSC itself acknowledged that both petitioner Abila and respondent Eleria are legally qualified for the position. 2) being next-in-rank to the vacancy which gave her promotional priority over Abila.D. ethnic. ARDELIZA MEDENILLA vs. Respondent Eleria. and in other functionally related occupational groups.
If. There are valid exceptions. Old employees should be considered first but it doesn’t follow that they should automatically be appointed. she has also acquired plenty of experience in the field of HRD. as earlier stated. In the case at bar. it is to foster a more efficient public service. CSC has no choice but to attest to the appointment. WON Medenilla was validly appointed by the appointing authority based on qualifications HELD: 1. 907 of attracting honor graduates into the public service would be negated if they always have to start as Clerk I and wait for hundreds of deadwood above them to first go into retirement before they can hope for significant and fulfilling assignments. one of them should’ve been appointed to the position.Respondents who are employees in the Human Resource Training and Material Development Division contested the appointment saying that being next-in-rank employees. there’s nothing in the Civil Service Law to prevent him from reaching out to other Departments or to the private sector provided all his acts are bona fide for the best interest of the public service and the person chosen has the needed qualifications. Once the function is discharged. . The essence of due process is the opportunity to be heard. The petitioner possesses these skills in more than appropriate quantities. the CSC’s participation in the appointment process ceases. in her 1 year 7 months experience with Guthrie-Jensen was engaged in research relating to performance appraisal systems and merit promotion systems which duties are all related to Human Resource Development. The presence of a party is not always the cornerstone of due process. The MR by Medenilla was denied. said rule is not absolute. The reason behind P. Yes RATIO: 1. The intent of the Civil Service Laws not merely to bestow upon permanent employees the advantage arising from their long employment but most specially. This is not always true and the law does not preclude the infusion of new blood. It is not within its prerogative to revoke an appointee on the ground that another person is better qualified for the job. research and statistics. Petitioner wasn’t only a cum laude graduate from the UP. WON CSC acted with grave abuse of discretion in disapproving appointment of Medenilla 3. When the appointee is qualified. younger dynamism. Besides. which she pursued as an entrance scholar. Yes 3. No. 3. CSC failed to consider that the petitioner. The preference given to permanent employees assumes that employees working in a Department for longer periods have gained not only superior skills but also greater dedication to the public service. The disputed position requires of the holder of the office. Granting for the sake of argument that the case involves a promotional appointment. In this case. the others are permanent. was a recipient of a special commendationgiven by Executive Director of the National Commission in the Role of Filipino Woman.D. the contested position was created in the course of reorganization. skills in human resource developmental planning. of the next-in-rank rule does not come in clearly. The position appears to be a new one. or necessary talents into the government service. No 2. She was ranked No. It also noted that while Medenilla is a contractual employee. therefore. after considering all the current employees. the Department Secretary cannot find among them the person he needs. any defect was cured by the filing of a motion for reconsideration. the next-in-rank rule must give way to the exigencies of the public service. ISSUES: 1. She obtained in her on-going MBA studies at the DLUS. WON Medenilla was denied due process when CSC did not inform her of the appeal before it 2. 2.1 in the Trainor's Training Program. The CSC sustained the protest saying that the next in rank should as far as practicable be appointed. The applicability.
This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
We've moved you to where you read on your other device.
Get the full title to continue reading from where you left off, or restart the preview.