Title
Bohol vs. Rosario
Case
G.R. No. L-5057
Decision Date
Jul 31, 1953
Petitioner’s salary raise for Secretary to Provincial Governor disapproved by Secretary of Finance; court upheld decision, ruling classification and disapproval valid under law.
A

Case Digest (G.R. No. L-5057)

Facts:

Jacinto R. Bohol filed a petition for mandamus in the Court of First Instance of Samar against Mauro Rosario, as provincial auditor, and Jose C. Orteza, as provincial treasurer. The petition was amended by including the Secretary of Finance as a respondent. On the merits, the trial court denied the application, and Bohol appealed. Bohol was the Secretary to the Provincial Governor of Samar. On July 19, 1950, his salary was raised from P3,120 to P3,600 per annum as an “exceptional case” under section 256 of the Revised Administrative Code, and on July 20, the provincial board approved the increase through a resolution. However, the Secretary of Finance, acting on Samar’s annual budget, disapproved the increase, stating that the standard rate for the same position in a first class A province like Samar was P2,760 per annum, and that the rate could be reduced to P2,760 only upon vacancy. As a consequence of this disapproval, the provincial auditor refused to pass in audit, and the provincial treasurer refused to pay, Bohol’s voucher for the differential between the old and new rates corresponding to the second half of July. Bohol argued that Republic Act No. 528, approved June 16, 1950, abrogated Executive Order No. 167 and that, in any event, Executive Order No. 167 was unconstitutional because it allegedly allowed the President to assume not only general supervision but actual control over local governments. The case thus hinged on whether the Secretary of Finance could intervene to enforce the Salary Law and whether Bohol’s position as secretary to the provincial governor warranted the P3,600 salary beyond the standard classification. In resolving the matter, the Court noted that Executive Order No. 167 (series of 1938) designated the Secretary of Finance as the national government agency for supervision and control of provincial financial affairs, including the submission of local budgets containing the plantilla of personnel, and that Executive Order No. 94 (series of 1947), issued under Republic Act No. 51, reorganized departments and amended the Salary Law by classifying positions into grades with salaries based on duties and qualifications, with salaries ranging from P2,400 to P6,000 per annum. Although Bohol claimed that his duties entitled him to Grade 1 with a salary of P6,000, the contrary position was that his position fell under Grade 13 with compensation of P2,760 per annum. The Court of First Instance dismissed the petition and the appellate review proceeded on the same record, ultimately affirming the dismissal.

Issues:

Whether the Secretary of Finance could validly disapprove and prevent the payment of Bohol’s increased salary on the ground that it was inconsistent with the Salary Law and the executive classification of positions, notwithstanding Bohol’s reliance on Republic Act No. 528 and his constitutional argument against Executive Order No. 167.

Ruling:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Ratio:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Doctrine:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster, building context before diving into full texts. AI-powered analysis, always verify critical details.