TOGUAY, Paul Jeffrey U.

2019-80129
Block 4
Topic: Administrative Agencies

Case Topic: The power of the Civil Service Commission to abolish the Career Executive
Service Board is challenged in this petition for certiorari and prohibition.

IN VIEW WHEREOF, the petition is granted and Resolution No. 93-4359 of the
respondent Commission is hereby annulled and set aside. No costs

Citation G.R. No. 115863

Date March 31, 1995

Petitioner AIDA D. EUGENIO

Respondent CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION, HON. TEOFISTO T. GUINGONA, JR. & HON.
SALVADOR ENRIQUEZ, JR.,

PRINCIPLES/
DOCTRINES
1. The creation and abolition of public offices is primarily a legislative
function.

2. Except for such offices as are created by the Constitution, the creation of
public offices is primarily a legislative function. In so far as the legislative
power in this respect is not restricted by constitutional provisions, it
supreme, and the legislature may decide for itself what offices are suitable,
necessary, or convenient. When in the exigencies of government it is
necessary to create and define duties, the legislative department has the
discretion to determine whether additional offices shall be created, or
whether these duties shall be attached to and become ex-officio duties of
existing offices. An office created by the legislature is wholly within the
power of that body, and it may prescribe the mode of filling the office and
the powers and duties of the incumbent, and if it sees fit, abolish the
office.

3. Under the Administrative Code of 1987, the purpose of attaching one

functionally inter-related government agency to another is to attain
 "policy and program coordination."

4. (3) Attachment. — (a) This refers to the lateral relationship between the
department or its equivalent and attached agency or corporation for
purposes of policy and program coordination. The coordination may be
accomplished by having the department represented in the governing
board of the attached agency or corporation, either as chairman or as a
member, with or without voting rights, if this is permitted by the charter;
having the attached corporation or agency comply with a system of
periodic reporting which shall reflect the progress of programs and
projects; and having the department or its equivalent provide general
policies through its representative in the board, which shall serve as the
framework for the internal policies of the attached corporation or agency.

PUNO, J.:

FACTS:
The Petitioner is the Deputy Director of the Philippine Nuclear Research Institute.
She applied for a Career Executive Service (CES) Eligibility and a CESO rank on August 2,
1993, she was given a CES eligibility. On September 15, 1993, she was recommended to the
President for a CESO rank by the Career Executive Service Board. On October 1, 1993,
respondent Civil Service Commission passed a Resolution 1, reorganizing and effecting
changes in its organizational structure. The above resolution became an impediment to
the appointment of petitioner as Civil Service Officer, Rank IV. The President Legal
Counsel Antonio Carpio wrote that issues had arisen resulting from the issuance of CSC
Resolution and encouraged the petitioner to seek relief before the appropriate court as
the Office of the President refrained from considering appointments of career service
eligibles to career executive ranks.

This prompted her to file a petition to annul the CSC Resolution.

ISSUE:
1. Whether or not The Civil Service Commission has power to abolish the CESB. -
No.

1 No. 93-4359
 2. Whether or not Section 17, Chapter 3, Subtitle A. Title I, Book V of the
Administrative Code of 1987 is a source for CSC to abolish CESB. - No.

RULING:
1. No. The Civil Service Commission has no power to abolish the CESB.

“The creation and abolition of public offices is primarily a legislative

function.”

Since the Career Executive Service Board (CESB) was created in the
Presidential Decree (P.D.) No. 1, a law, it can only be abolished by the legislature.
Furthermore, the legislature has not enacted any law authorizing the abolition of
the CESB.

2. No. Section 17, Chapter 3, Subtitle A. Title I, Book V of the Administrative Code of
1987 is not a source for CSC to abolish CESB as it must read together with Section
16 of the same Code.

As read together, the inescapable conclusion is that the respondent

Commission's power to reorganize is limited to offices under its control as
enumerated in Section 16, supra.

In the case at bar, the CESB is not listed in section 16 whose offices are
under the reorganization power of the Civil Service Commission.

The CESB shall be autonomous. It is expected to view the problem of

building up executive manpower in the government with a broad and positive
outlook." The essential autonomous character of the CESB is not negated by its
attachment to the respondent Commission. By said attachment, CESB was not
made to fall within the control of the respondent Commission.

Xxx nothing follows xxx