Facts:

• Jose C. Tecson was the Superintendent of Dredging at the Bureau of Public Works.
• On October 14, 1966, Executive Secretary Rafael Salas, under presidential authority, issued a directive detailing Tecson to the Office of the President.
• Tecson argued that this detail was effectively a removal from his position without cause, which he claimed was unconstitutional.
• The lower court, led by Judge Juan O. Reyes, dismissed Tecson's petition on December 17, 1966, citing a lack of cause of action.
• Respondents were represented by Solicitor General Antonio P. Barredo and Solicitor Augusto M. Amores.
• Tecson was represented by Salva, Carballo & Associates and Edmundo M. Villanueva.
• Tecson appealed the decision, asserting that his detail was a removal or transfer without his consent, violating constitutional provisions.

Issue:

• (Unlock)

Ruling:

1. The Supreme Court ruled that the detail of Tecson to the Office of the President does not constitute a removal from office without cause.
2. The Court affirmed that the Preside...(Unlock)

Ratio:

• The Supreme Court upheld the lower court's dismissal of Tecson's petition, emphasizing the extensive executive powers granted to the President by the Constitution.
• The Court referred to the precedent set in Villena v. Secretary of Interior, which established that executive and administrative functions are executed by and through the executive departments, with the actions of department heads being presumptively those of the President.
• The President's power of control over executive departments, bureaus, and offices is all-encompassing, allowing him to order details and transfers in the interest of public service, provided there is no reduction in rank or salary.
• The Court rejected Tecson's argument t...continue reading