G.R. No. 131954 - Montecillo vs. Civil Service Commission

The Metropolitan Cebu Water District (MCWD) reclassified its employee positions in late 1995 to align with civil service position descriptions and salary grades, following the precedent of *Davao City Water District vs. Civil Service Commission*.
Petitioners Asela B. Montecillo, Marilou Joan V. Ortega, and Charrishe Dosdos, who had been working as "Department Secretary" employees at MCWD for six to seven years, applied for promotional appointments to the position of "Secretary to the Assistant General Manager" or "Private Secretary C."

The MCWD General Manager forwarded petitioners' appointments to the Civil Service Commission Field Office (CSC FO).
The CSC FO declined to approve the appointments as "permanent" on the ground that the position applied for was a "primarily confidential" and "co-terminous" position.
The CSC Regional Office upheld this ruling.
The Civil Service Commission (CSC) en banc affirmed the decision on appeal through Resolution No. 972512.

Resolution No. 972512 was grounded on CSC Memorandum Circular No. 22, Series of 1991, which classified all "Private Secretary" positions as primarily confidential and stipulated that their incumbents’ tenure should be coterminous with the official they serve.
The circular explicitly extended this classification to Private Secretary positions, irrespective of their location, beyond those identified in an earlier CSC Memorandum Circular No. 14, s. 1987, and Section 9, Chapter 2 of Executive Order No. 292.
The circular allowed appointment holders who previously occupied Private Secretary positions as permanent to retain such status until the position was vacated.
Agencies desiring to retain Private Secretary positions as career service posts were instructed to request a title change to "Secretary" from the Department of Budget and Management.

Petitioners sought nullification of Resolution No. 972512, challenging the validity of Memorandum Circular No. 22, s. 1991.
They argued that the circular unduly amended and expanded the scope of the non-career service as defined under Section 6, Article IV of the Civil Service Decree (P.D. 807).
Petitioners contended that the CSC exceeded its rule-making power by effectively amending the law to add positions to the statutory list of non-career posts, rendering the circular and resolution null and void.
Petitioners elevated the case through a special civil action under Rule 65 of the Revised Rules of Court after denial of their motion for reconsideration by the CSC.

The Office of the Solicitor General manifested on behalf of the CSC, defending the validity of Memorandum Circular No. 22, s. 1991.
The Supreme Court was tasked with determining whether the CSC committed grave abuse of discretion or exceeded its jurisdiction in issuing the memorandum circular.

Whether the Civil Service Commission (CSC) acted with grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction when it issued Memorandum Circular No. 22, Series of 1991, classifying all Private Secretary positions as primarily confidential and co-terminous, expanding the scope of non-career service.

Whether the CSC Memorandum Circular No. 22, s. 1991, unlawfully amended the statutory enumeration of non-career service positions under Section 6, Article IV of the Civil Service Decree (P.D. 807).

Whether the petitioners’ promotional appointments to the position of "Private Secretary" should be approved as permanent posts contrary to the CSC ruling and circular.