Title
Civil Service Commission vs. Dacoycoy
Case
G.R. No. 135805
Decision Date
Apr 29, 1999
A school administrator was dismissed for nepotism after facilitating his sons' appointments under his supervision, violating anti-nepotism laws.

Case Digest (G.R. No. 200295)

Facts:

  • Filing of Complaint and Initial Proceedings
    • On November 29, 1995, George P. Suan, Vice-President of Citizens Crime Watch, Allen Chapter, Northern Samar, filed with the Civil Service Commission (CSC) a complaint against Pedro O. Dacoycoy for habitual drunkenness, misconduct, and nepotism.
    • The CSC Regional Office No. 8 in Tacloban City conducted a fact-finding investigation, found a prima facie case, and on March 5, 1996, issued a formal charge against Dacoycoy.
  • Administrative Investigation and CSC Resolution
    • After a formal investigation, on January 28, 1997, the CSC promulgated a resolution:
      • Exonerated Dacoycoy of habitual drunkenness and misconduct for lack of substantial evidence.
      • Found him guilty of nepotism for appointing his two sons—Rito as driver and Ped as utility worker—under his immediate supervision at Balicuatro College of Arts and Trades.
      • Imposed the penalty of dismissal from the service.
    • Dacoycoy filed a motion for reconsideration on February 25, 1997; it was denied by the CSC on May 20, 1997.
  • Court of Appeals Proceedings and Appeal to the Supreme Court
    • On July 18, 1997, Dacoycoy filed a special civil action for certiorari with preliminary injunction in the Court of Appeals (CA) to annul the CSC resolutions.
    • On July 29, 1998, the CA reversed the CSC, ruling that Dacoycoy did not himself appoint or recommend his sons and thus was not guilty of nepotism; it held that only the appointing or recommending authority may be sanctioned.
    • The CSC petitioned the Supreme Court for certiorari; Dacoycoy filed his comment on December 11, 1998, and the petition was given due course.

Issues:

  • Whether the ban on nepotism under Section 59, E.O. 292 (Civil Service Law), applies to appointments made in favor of relatives of the person exercising immediate supervision over the appointee, even if that person did not personally sign the appointment.
  • Whether the Civil Service Commission, as an administrative body, is an “aggrieved party” entitled to appeal a CA decision exonerating a civil servant from an administrative charge.

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.