Facts:

The case Angel Abad vs. Herminio Dela Cruz revolves around the appointment of Herminio Dela Cruz as the City Government Department Head III or City Assessor of Muntinlupa City, which was formalized on December 28, 2006, by then Mayor Jaime R. Fresnedi. The Philippine Civil Service Commission (CSC) later attested to this appointment. Angel Abad, then holding the position of Local Assessment Operations Officer V, challenged Dela Cruz's promotion to Department Head III, claiming it contravened the three-salary-grade rule stated in Civil Service Commission Memorandum Circular No. 3, Series of 2001. This rule prohibits the promotion of an employee to a position exceeding three salary grades above their current rank unless in exceptional circumstances. Abad argued he was qualified and had been unfairly excluded from the appointment process and had written several letters of grievance to the Civil Service Commission regarding the issue, ultimately leading to an investigation. A Gri

...

Facts:

Appointment and Background

• Herminio Dela Cruz was permanently appointed as City Government Department Head III (City Assessor) of the City Government of Muntinlupa on December 28, 2006, by Mayor Jaime R. Fresnedi.
• The position of City Assessor is categorized under City Government Department Head III, which carries a higher salary grade (27) compared to Dela Cruz’s previous post as Local Assessment Operations Officer III (Salary Grade 18).

Administrative Process and Endorsements

• The Sangguniang Panlungsod (City Council) endorsed the appointment through Resolution No. 06-361, demonstrating concurrence on the suitability of Dela Cruz for the position.
• The City Government of Muntinlupa’s Personnel Selection Board conducted an evaluation based on various criteria (performance, work history, awards, education, training, potential, physical characteristics, and personality traits). Out of nine applicants, Dela Cruz emerged with the highest score of 90.67 out of 100 points.
• Pursuant to Civil Service Commission (CSC) Resolution No. 02-1235, the appointment was attested to by the CSC, thus completing the formalities required under civil service rules.

Allegations and Protest by Angel Abad

• Angel A. Abad, a Local Assessment Operations Officer V, contended that the promotion violated the three-salary-grade rule as prescribed in Civil Service Commission Memorandum Circular No. 3, Series of 2001.
• Abad argued that a promotion exceeding the allowable three salary grades (from SG 18 to SG 27) should be void unless it qualifies under the “very meritorious case” exception.
• He further maintained that as a qualified next-in-rank employee, he should have been automatically considered and eventually appointed to the vacant position, alleging exclusion from the shortlist in the deep selection process.

Procedural Developments and Grievance Process

• Abad’s initial complaint was communicated to the CSC on January 26, 2007, and was subsequently referred to the City Government of Muntinlupa’s grievance machinery.
• Due to the fire incident at City Hall on August 3, 2007, which destroyed pertinent records, the grievance process was delayed.
• On September 25, 2007, Abad filed a letter-complaint reiterating his request to disapprove the appointment of Dela Cruz. This complaint was forwarded to the City Government’s Personnel Department.
• The Grievance Committee found that the promotion violated the three-salary-grade rule and recommended invalidation of Dela Cruz’s appointment. This recommendation was approved by the new Mayor Aldrin San Pedro.

CSC, Court of Appeals, and Further Proceedings

• On August 17, 2009, the Civil Service Commission-National Capital Region invalidated Dela Cruz’s appointment based on the alleged violation of the three-salary-grade rule.
• Upon appeal, the CSC reversed the initial decision in its Resolution No. 101276 dated June 22, 2010, reasoning that the appointment qualified as a “very meritorious case” after a deep selection process.
• Angel Abad filed a Petition for Review before the Court of Appeals, but his petition was dismissed in the Decision dated April 11, 2012, which reiterated that the next-in-rank rule is a preference—not an absolute right—and that as long as the appointee meets the minimum qualifications, the appointment is valid.
• Subsequent motions for reconsideration by Abad were denied, and eventually he elevated the case to the Supreme Court through a Petition for Review on Certiorari.

Contentions Raised in the Supreme Court

• Abad posited two primary issues: (a) that Dela Cruz’s promotion violated the next-in-rank rule by bypassing him and other similarly ranked employees, and (b) that the deep selection process was flawed or non-existent, thereby rendering the appointment void.
• Dela Cruz defended his appointment by emphasizing that he had undergone a stringent selection process and that his qualifications met all legal requirements, justifying the “very meritorious” exception despite the numerical salary grade jump.

Issue:

Whether the appointment of Herminio Dela Cruz as City Government Department Head III is void because it purportedly violates the next-in-rank rule.

• The issue centers on whether the next-in-rank employee (in this case, Angel Abad) has a vested right to the promotion.
• It also questions if the statutory preference for the next-in-rank automatically translates to an exclusive right to be appointed.

Whether the appointment is challengeable on the basis of the alleged lack of a deep selection process.

• Abad contends that the selection process did not adhere to the rigorous standards mandated under civil service regulations.
• The issue involves determining whether the methodology and criteria used in the Personnel Selection Board’s evaluation were sufficient and equitable.

Whether the three-salary-grade rule was violated in the promotion process, considering that Dela Cruz’s promotion exceeded this limit without proper adherence to the exceptions provided.

• The contention examines if the “very meritorious case” exception applies in this instance to override the salary grade limitation.
• It also involves reviewing whether Abad’s allegations regarding the numerical jump from SG 18 to SG 27 stand on legal ground.

Ruling:

• (Subscriber-Only)

Ratio:

• (Subscriber-Only)

Doctrine:

• (Subscriber-Only)