Title
Provincial Government of Aurora vs. Marco
Case
G.R. No. 202331
Decision Date
Apr 22, 2015
Hilario Marco's appointment as Cooperative Development Specialist II was upheld as valid despite fund certification withdrawal; reinstatement and back salaries ordered.

Case Digest (G.R. No. 202331)

Facts:

  • Procedural Background
    • The Provincial Government of Aurora (Petitioner) contested the validity of Hilario M. Marco’s (Respondent) appointment as Cooperative Development Specialist II before the Civil Service Commission (CSC), the Court of Appeals (CA), and ultimately the Supreme Court (SC).
    • The petition involves CSC resolutions dated April 14, 2008 (granting Marco’s appeal), July 6, 2010 (ordering implementation), and subsequent motions for relief and reconsideration by the Province.
  • Appointment and Initial Disapproval
    • On June 25, 2004—five days before Governor Ong’s term ended—Marco was permanently appointed by Governor Ramoncita P. Ong, with a June 28 submission to CSC Field Office–Aurona accompanied by a certification of available funds from the Provincial Budget Officer and Accountant.
    • On June 30, 2004, the new governor took office; the Provincial Budget Officer withdrew the funds certification, prompting the Field Office to disapprove Marco’s appointment on July 5, 2004, and advising him to stop reporting effective July 8, 2004.
  • Administrative Remedies and CSC Rulings
    • Marco filed for reconsideration with CSC Regional Office No. IV; the April 6, 2005 decision affirmed the disapproval.
    • On appeal to the CSC Proper (May 17, 2005), the Province failed to comment within the required 10-day period.
    • CSC Resolution No. 08-0656 (April 14, 2008) granted Marco’s appeal, reversed the disapproval, ordered reflection of the decision in his records, and referred an investigation into the fund certifiers.
  • Province’s Attempts to Challenge Execution
    • Petition for Relief (July 22, 2008): denied November 4, 2008 for lack of authority and remedy under CSC rules.
    • Motion for Reconsideration with Governor’s authority (filed after): denied September 8, 2009 as Resolution No. 08-0656 had become final and executory.
    • Implementation Request (filed by Marco): CSC Resolution No. 101361 (July 6, 2010) ordered Marco’s reinstatement and payment of back salaries.
    • Motion to Quash Execution (filed July 2010): denied January 24, 2011; CSC clarified the April 14, 2008 resolution approved Marco’s appointment and entitled him to reinstatement and back pay.
  • Judicial Review
    • CA Petition for Review (filed post‐January 2011 resolution): Decision dated March 2, 2012 denied the Province’s petition, affirmed CSC’s April 14, 2008 and July 6, 2010 resolutions.
    • Motion for Reconsideration denied June 13, 2012.
    • SC Petition for Review on Certiorari raised three issues: validity of the July 6, 2010 implementation order; effect of fund certification withdrawal; and whether Marco was a prohibited “midnight appointee.”

Issues:

  • Whether CSC Resolution No. 101361 (July 6, 2010), implementing the April 14, 2008 decision, was void for varying the terms of the April 14, 2008 resolution.
  • Whether the withdrawal of the certification of funds invalidated Marco’s appointment.
  • Whether Marco’s June 25, 2004 appointment was void as a “midnight appointment” under applicable rules.

Ruling:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Ratio:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Doctrine:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster, building context before diving into full texts. AI-powered analysis, always verify critical details.