Case Digest (G.R. No. 225151)
Facts:
Civil Service Commission v. Peter G. Cutao, G.R. No. 225151, September 30, 2020, Supreme Court Second Division, Inting, J., writing for the Court.The petitioner is the Civil Service Commission (CSC); the respondent is Peter G. Cutao, a police officer who had received successive promotions within the Philippine National Police (PNP) to Police Officer III (PO3), Senior Police Officer I (SPO1), and SPO2, all approvals signed by CSC field officials. Cutao’s application for promotion to SPO2 included a Personal Data Sheet, a transcript of records from the Agusan Institute of Technology (AIT) indicating graduation in 1996/1997, and a CHED Certification, Authorization and Verification (CAV) dated May 28, 2007 purporting to authenticate those documents.
The CSC Field Office (CSCFO), Agusan del Norte, sought verification from CHED Caraga. On June 30, 2011, CHED Caraga returned a pro forma verification slip marking Cutao’s transcript and CAV as “not authentic,” explaining that the signatures on the CAV were not genuine and that the Special Order shown on Cutao’s transcript referred to another person. Relying on that verification and the absence of other convincing proof of a bachelor’s degree, CSC Regional Office (CSCRO) No. XIII issued Decision No. LSD‑NDC‑12‑006 dated January 19, 2012 recalling the approvals of Cutao’s promotional appointments and directed implementation steps to revert him to his prior rank.
Cutao appealed to the Commission Proper (CSC Proper). In Decision No. 120653 dated October 2, 2012, the CSC Proper dismissed his appeal and upheld the invalidation of the promotions because CHED had declared his submitted transcript and CAV inauthentic and he failed to produce conclusive contrary proof. Cutao’s Motion for Reconsideration was denied.
Cutao then filed a petition with the Court of Appeals (CA) (CA‑G.R. SP No. 05397‑MIN). The CA (Assoc. Justice Maria Filomena D. Singh, with Justices Edgardo A. Camello and Perpetua T. Atal‑Pano, concurring) reversed the CSC rulings in a January 27, 2016 Decision, finding that the CHED pro forma verification slip did not constitute substantial evidence, that Cutao had acquired a legal right to office through his years of service and the prior CSC approvals, and that due process required notice and hearing before recalling an appointment; the C...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- May the Civil Service Commission recall a previously approved appointment to the civil service without prior notice and hear...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)