G.R. No. 173186 - Uy vs. Court of Appeals

Dr. Leonora B. Ignacio served as Division Superintendent of Public Schools in Cavite City.
She was appointed through a process that involved recognition of her qualifications, including her Career Executive Service (CES) status.

On May 2, 2002, through former Undersecretary Ramon C. Bacani, the DECS Secretary issued an order reassigning Dr. Ignacio to the Division of Schools in Puerto Princesa City effective immediately.
The reassignment was communicated by Regional Director Paraluman R. Giron via a letter dated May 6, 2002.

On May 10, 2002, Undersecretary Bacani issued a memorandum directing Regional Director Giron to hold Dr. Ignacio's reassignment in abeyance until further notice.
Dr. Giron informed Dr. Ignacio about the hold via a letter dated May 13, 2002.
On May 14, 2002, Undersecretary Bacani reiterated the reassignment order, confirming Dr. Ignacio’s placement in Puerto Princesa City and designating Dr. Alma Bella O. Bautista as the new Cavite City superintendent.
Dr. Giron then communicated the reaffirmed directive to Dr. Ignacio by letter dated May 21, 2002.

Instead of complying with the reassignment order, Dr. Ignacio petitioned the CSC for its nullification.
The petitioner argued that:

The reassignment was arbitrary, oppressive, and contrary to law.
As a presidential appointee with CES Rank V eligibility, her reappointment authority resided solely with the President (through the DECS Secretary) and could not be delegated to an Undersecretary.
The transfer amounted to a demotion on grounds that Cavite (a Class A province) was being replaced by Puerto Princesa City (a Class D city), that the latter was geographically distant, and that the number of subordinate personnel was significantly reduced.

DECS Order No. 7, Series of 1994, due to non-consultation of the National Search Committee.
Republic Act No. 4670 (the "Magna Carta for Public School Teachers") on the basis of non-consent for reassignment.
Relevant rules of the CSC and the Commission on Elections concerning reassignment during the Barangay Elections period.

The petitioner further contended that political considerations influenced the decision, referencing a letter by Governor Ireneo Maliksi.

On November 27, 2003, the CSC issued Resolution No. 031179 dismissing Dr. Ignacio’s petition.
The CSC held that Undersecretary Bacani was acting on behalf of the DECS Secretary, and that the reassignment fell within the permissible scope of the CES guidelines.
The CSC explained that as long as the reassignment did not involve any reduction in rank, salary, or status, it was valid.
The petition’s allegations regarding political motivation and procedural irregularities were rejected.
Subsequent petitions before the Court of Appeals and the filing of a petition for certiorari under Rule 65 were dismissed on procedural and substantive grounds.

The proper remedy was a petition for review under Rule 43, which the petitioner failed to file within the prescribed period.
The petitioner’s reassignment, based on her CES rank and the applicable principles of the Integrated Reorganization Plan, was valid and not a demotion.

The petition for review on certiorari under Rule 45 was denied on grounds of lack of merit and mootness due to her removal from rolls and replacement.

Whether the reassignment of Dr. Ignacio by Undersecretary Bacani, acting on behalf of the DECS Secretary, was legally valid despite her claim that only the President could reappoint her.
Whether the chain of orders and communications properly effectuated the reassignment.

Whether the reassignment violated internal DECS rules, such as DECS Order No. 7, by failing to consult the National Search Committee.
Whether the reassignment constituted a demotion given the differences between Cavite City and Puerto Princesa City in terms of classification, location, and number of subordinates.

Whether a CES officer’s security of tenure is attached only to rank and not to a specific post or office.
The proper interpretation of the provisions under the Integrated Reorganization Plan regarding assignments and reassignment mobility.

Whether Dr. Ignacio’s failure to timely file a petition for review under Rule 43 renders any subsequent petition moot or academic.
The impact of the procedural lapses on the overall validity of her claim.