Case Digest (G.R. No. 152574) Core Legal Reasoning Model
Core Legal Reasoning Model
Facts:
Francisco A. Abella Jr., a lawyer, retired from the Export Processing Zone Authority (now PEZA) on July 1, 1996 as Department Manager of its Legal Services Department. He held civil service eligibility for that post by completing the Executive Leadership and Management program in 1982 pursuant to CSC Resolution No. 850. On May 31, 1994, the Civil Service Commission issued Memorandum Circular No. 21, s. 1994, which classified all third‐level positions as part of the Career Executive Service (CES) and prescribed that incumbents first declared CES who held permanent appointments would remain permanent but would assume temporary status upon promotion or transfer to other CES posts until they secured a Career Service Executive Eligibility (CSEE). Two years after retirement, Abella was engaged by the SBMA on contract and on January 1, 1999 was given permanent status as Department Manager III of its Labor and Employment Center. When SBMA submitted his appointment to CSC Regional Office Case Digest (G.R. No. 152574) Expanded Legal Reasoning Model
Expanded Legal Reasoning Model
Facts:
- Petitioner’s Background and Prior Eligibility
- Francisco A. Abella, Jr., a lawyer, retired on July 1, 1996 from the Export Processing Zone Authority (now PEZA) as Department Manager, Legal Services.
- He held civil service eligibility for that post by completing the Executive Leadership and Management (ELM) training in 1982 under CSC Resolution No. 850.
- CSC Memorandum Circular No. 21, s. 1994
- Classified all third-level positions in the Career Executive Service (CES), including Department Manager III, as requiring Career Service Executive Eligibility (CSEE).
- Provided that incumbents holding permanent appointments at the time of classification remain permanent in their original posts but serve on temporary status in other CES positions until they qualify.
- SBMA Appointment and CSC Disapproval
- On January 1, 1999, SBMA appointed petitioner permanently as Department Manager III, Labor and Employment Center.
- CSC Regional Office No. III disapproved the appointment for lack of appropriate eligibility.
- Petitioner was then issued a temporary appointment on July 9, 1999.
- Petitioner appealed to CSC Central Office; CSC Resolution No. 000059 (Jan. 10, 2000) affirmed disapproval, and its Resolution No. 001143 (May 11, 2000) denied reconsideration.
- Proceedings in the Court of Appeals
- Petitioner filed CA-GR SP No. 58987 seeking reversal of CSC Resolutions dated January 10 and May 11, 2000.
- The Court of Appeals denied the petition for review for lack of standing and real party in interest, and refused to pass on the constitutionality of Memorandum Circular No. 21.
- The CA also denied petitioner’s motion for reconsideration.
- Petitioner then filed a petition for review under Rule 45 before the Supreme Court.
Issues:
- Whether the Court of Appeals gravely abused its discretion in ruling that petitioner lacked legal standing to challenge the CSC’s disapproval of his appointment.
- Whether the CA gravely abused its discretion in ruling that petitioner was not the real party in interest to question the CSC’s disapproval.
- Whether the CA gravely abused its discretion in dismissing petitioner’s appeal on technical grounds despite his challenge to the constitutionality of Section 4 of CSC Memorandum Circular No. 21, s. 1994, as depriving him of property rights without due process.
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)