Facts:

• The case involves the termination of the Rice Research and Development Project 2.10 by the National Science Development Board (NSDB).
• The NSDB decided to discontinue the project after December 31, 1959, as it had already passed the research stage and was ready for commercial activities.
• Director Serrano, in charge of the project, refused to recognize the decision and continued to work on the project with his team.
• Serrano and his team filed a complaint to recover their salaries and wages for work performed after December 31, 1959, as well as damages.

Issue:

• (Unlock)

Ruling:

• The court ruled in favor of the NSDB and dismissed the complaint.
• Employees who continued to work on terminated pr...(Unlock)

Ratio:

• The NSDB had the power to revive, continue, or terminate any of the projects initiated by the defunct National Science Board.
• This power was necessary for the NSDB to fulfill its mission and objectives.
• Therefore, the NSDB had the discretion to terminate the Rice Research and Development Project 2.10.
• Employees who worked on the project after its termination did so in defiance of the NSDB's decision.
• Many of these employees were mere emergency or temporary workers, without a definite tenure or right to continue in their positions.
• Therefore, they could not claim salaries and wages for work performed after the termination of the project.
• A note from the former President advocating for the project's continuation should be considered a persuasive effect and did not nullify the NSDB's resolution to terminate the services of the employees.
• If the NSDB ignored the...continue reading