Case Digest (G.R. No. 144153)
Facts:
Petitioner Ma. Chona M. Dimayuga was appointed permanently as Executive Director II of the Toll Regulatory Board on October 26, 1992 and supervised its divisions and BOT projects; the position was classified under the Career Executive Service on June 4, 1993 and Civil Service Commission Memorandum Circular No. 21 issued on May 31, 1994. During her tenure she was suspended twice (November 28, 1997 and March 26, 1998), was detailed and asked to report to other offices in June 1998, was replaced by respondent Mariano E. Benedicto II by letter dated September 22, 1998, and filed a petition for quo warranto on September 6, 1999 which the Court of Appeals dismissed on July 25, 2000.Issues:
- Did Dimayuga acquire a vested right to the position of Executive Director II by virtue of her 1992 permanent appointment?
- Was Dimayuga’s refusal to vacate the post inconsistent with the President’s power of appointment and removal?
- Did Dimayuga have security of tenure in the Career Executive
Case Digest (G.R. No. 144153)
Facts:
- Background of the appointment and office
- MA. CHONA M. DIMAYUGA, PETITIONER received a permanent appointment dated October 26, 1992 from then Secretary of Public Works and Highways Jose P. de Jesus as Executive Director II of the TOLL REGULATORY BOARD.
- As Executive Director II, petitioner exercised control and supervision over the Board's three divisions and oversaw Board *build-operate-and-transfer* projects including the Metro Manila Skyway Project and the Manila-Cavite Tollway Project, and participated in negotiations for the Manila-Subic Expressway and South Luzon Tollway Extension Projects.
- The position of Executive Director II was not part of the Career Executive Service (CES) at the time of petitioner's 1992 appointment; the position was included in the CES on June 4, 1993.
- On May 31, 1994 the Civil Service Commission issued Memorandum Circular No. 21, whose Section 4 provided that incumbents of positions declared CES positions for the first time who hold permanent appointments shall remain under permanent status but shall be temporary upon promotion or transfer to other CES positions until they qualify.
- Administrative actions, suspensions, and reassignment
- Petitioner became the subject of several administrative and criminal complaints.
- Respondent GREGORIO R. VIGILAR issued a first ninety-day suspension order dated November 28, 1997.
- A second ninety-day suspension order dated March 26, 1998 was issued by then Executive Secretary Alexander Aguirre; petitioner contested the second suspension before the Office of the President.
- Petitioner re-assumed duties on June 25, 1998; on June 26, 1998 respondent VIGILAR issued Department Order No. 85, s. 1998 temporarily detailing petitioner to the Office of the Secretary and directed her by a June 26, 1998 memorandum to report to the Department Legal Service to assist in certain legal matters.
- Petitioner filed a leave of absence until September 30, 1998 in protest rather than assume the detailed assignment.
- Correspondence on status and replacement
- Petitioner requested clarification of her status by letter dated December 1, 1998; the Career Executive Service Board (CESB) replied December 15, 1998 stating its stand to honor permanent appointment status of incumbents appointed to positions later included in the CES.
- While on leave, petitioner received a September 22, 1998 letter (received September 28, 1998) from respondent VIGILAR informing her that President Joseph E. Estrada appointed MARIANO E. BENEDICTO II in her stead as Executive Director II.
- The September 22, 1998 letter cited an Executive Secretary memorandum dated June 30, 1998 from RONALDO B. ZAMORA instructing that non-career...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Whether Petitioner acquired a vested right to hold the position of Executive Director II despite lacking CES eligibility.
- Whether petitioner's 1992 permanent appointment conferred security of tenure once the position was later included in the CES.
- Whether petitioner's refusal to vacate the position conflicted with the President's power of appointment and removal.
- Whether petitioner could assert proprietary rights in the office that would impede the appointing authority.
- Whether petitioner is entitled to the constitutional guarantee of security of tenure and protection against removal except for cause provided by law.
- Whether security of tenure in the CES attaches to position or to rank/eligibility.
- Whether the Court of Appeals erred in dismissi...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)