G.R. No. 172027 - Go, Jr. vs. Court of Appeals

In 1980, Gonzalo S. Go, Jr. was appointed as Hearing Officer III of the Board of Transportation (BOT) with an annual salary of PhP 16,860.
On June 19, 1987, Executive Order No. 202 was issued, creating the Land Transportation Franchising and Regulatory Board (LTFRB) within the Department of Transportation and Communications (DOTC), thereby replacing the BOT.
On February 1, 1990, the DOTC Secretary promoted Go to Chief Hearing Officer (Chief, Legal Division) with an increased annual salary of PhP 151,800; this appointment was later confirmed as permanent by the Civil Service Commission (CSC).

LTFRB Administrative Division Chief certified that Go’s promotion was to the position of Attorney VI, SG-26, in line with budgetary circulars at the time.
On March 13, 1991, the Department of Budget and Management (DBM) informed the DOTC Secretary by letter that there was an erroneous classification in the Position Allocation List; division chief positions in bureau-level agencies (such as LTFRB) were meant to be allocated to Attorney V, SG-25, rather than Attorney VI, SG-26.
Following communications between the DBM and DOTC, the reclassification and corresponding changes in salaries were implemented effective April 8, 1991.
Go, questioning the “summary demotion” and downgrading of his salary grade from SG-26 to SG-25, wrote a protest letter to the DBM.

The DBM Secretary denied Go’s protest on September 14, 1998, stating that LTFRB’s decisions are appealable to the DOTC Secretary pursuant to Section 6 of EO 202.
Go sought reconsideration by arguing that LTFRB, like the Civil Aeronautics Board (CAB), should have its decisions reviewed directly by the Court of Appeals (CA) under Rule 43.
After his motion for reconsideration was denied, Go elevated his appeal to the Office of the President (OP) in OP Case No. 99‑8880, which similarly dismissed his appeal.
Undeterred, Go filed a petition for review before the Court of Appeals under Rule 43 (docketed as CA-G.R. SP No. 90665).

By Resolution dated August 17, 2005, the CA dismissed Go’s petition on procedural grounds:

The appeal mode was deemed inappropriate because Rule 43 applies only to decisions of quasi-judicial agencies, not to administrative actions like that of the DBM or OP.
The petition failed to comply with Section 6(a) of Rule 43.
Go’s counsel was found to have violated specific Bar Matter Nos. 287 and 1132 by not including necessary IBP and PTR receipt details.

The CA further dismissed his motion for reconsideration in its Resolution dated January 31, 2006, prompting the present petition for certiorari.

Did the Court of Appeals commit grave abuse of discretion in dismissing the petition on the ground that the remedy availed (Rule 43) was the wrong mode of appeal?

Whether Rule 43, typically reserved for review of decisions made in the exercise of quasi-judicial functions, was improperly applied to a personnel action.
Whether the DBM’s administrative action—subject to alternative remedies through the CSC—rendered the Rule 43 appeal improper.

Did the Court of Appeals err in dismissing the petition for failure to implead a private respondent by relying on Section 6(a) of Rule 43?

Whether the requirement to implead a private respondent existed when only the DBM and OP were positioned as respondents.
Whether the procedural rules should be strictly applied given that no private respondent was involved.

Was the dismissal of the petition justified on the ground that the petitioner’s counsel failed to indicate current IBP and PTR receipt numbers and dates of issue?

Whether such technical omissions, explained by an honest inadvertence with supporting documents, should preclude the merits of the case.
If strict observance of such procedural rules would result in an inequitable outcome.

Did the dismissal of the petition on technical and procedural grounds amount to an abuse or excess of jurisdiction by the Court of Appeals, thereby shirking its duty to address the salient legal issue concerning the reallocation of Go’s position and salary?