Case Digest (G.R. No. L-3393)
Facts:
Petitioner Dr. Gervasio Erana filed a quo warranto proceeding to test his right to serve as Chairman of the Board of Dental Examiners, and to seek the ouster of respondent Dr. Ermelo Vergel de Dios, who claimed the office by virtue of his earlier appointment under Act No. 4007. On December 1, 1948, the Secretary of Health issued Department Order No. 68 (s. 1948) appointing Dr. de Dios as Chairman and others as members for a one-year term under the former law.
On June 18, 1949, Republic Act No. 417 took effect, requiring creation of a new three-member Board, with members holding three-year terms. Because the regular Secretary of Health was abroad, Acting Secretary Dr. Regino G. Padua issued Department Order No. 37 (s. 1949) on the thirtieth day after the law’s effectivity, appointing Dr. Erana as Chairman, but Dr. Erana took his oath later on September 30, 1949. Meanwhile, on September 28, 1949, the regular Secretary issued Department Order No. 44 (s. 1949), setting aside Department Order No. 37 and directing the former appointees to continue, which the respondent relied upon to retain the chairmanship.
Issues:
- Whether Republic Act No. 417 superseded the former Board under Act No. 4007 such that the Board appointed under the old law could be replaced before December 1, 1949.
- Whether the Acting Secretary of Health had authority to issue Department Order No. 37 (s. 1949) appointing petitioner as Chairman.
- Whether Department Order No. 44 (s. 1949) revoking Department Order No. 37 was valid despite Republic Act No. 417.
Ruling:
The Court held that Department Order No. 44 (s. 1949) was null and void ab initio for being contrary to Republic Act No. 417, and that Department Order No. 37 (s. 1949) therefore subsisted. Consequently, petitioner was entitled to the office and respondent had no right to continue as Chairman.
The petition was granted.
Ratio:
The Court ruled that the provisions of the former law on qualifications and tenure were inconsistent with those of Republic Act No. 417, and that Republic Act No. 417 intended to replace the pre-existing Board; sustaining the old Board would render Section 2 of Republic Act No. 417 nugatory. Since the former members’ one-year terms did not prejudice the public administration of dentistry examinations, the respondent’s reliance on the continuation of the old Board failed.
The Court further held that Dr. Padua acted as Acting Secretary of Health and thus could perform the legally mandated act of creating the new Board within the statutory period. Lastly, while a Department Secretary may revoke appointments or orders of a predecessor, such power cannot contravene statute; enforcing Department Order No. 44 would reinstate an abolished Board and defeat the statutory scheme, so it could not stand.
Doctrine:
- Where two laws on the same subject provide inconsistent requirements, the later law supersedes the former, and the administrative structure provided by the old law cannot continue in conflict with the new statute.
- Acts issued by an Acting Secretary in the exercise of the Department Head’s duties have the same legal efficacy as those of the regular incumbent.
- A revocation issued through executive action is invalid when it contravenes the statute it is meant to implement or preserve; the government acts under the rule of law, not discretion beyond statutory limits.
- If enforcing an executive order would render a statute’s operative provision nugatory, the order is contrary to law and is void ab initio.