Title
Tolentino vs. De Jesus
Case
G.R. No. L-32797
Decision Date
Mar 27, 1974
The Supreme Court upheld the Court of Appeals' ruling that Pio L. Tolentino's temporary appointment as chief of police lacked constitutional security of tenure and did not convert to a permanent position despite passing the examination.
Font Size

Case Digest (G.R. No. L-32797)

Facts:

  • Pio L. Tolentino was the petitioner against Francisco de Jesus, Aquilino Pascual, and the Honorable Court of Appeals.
  • Tolentino began his service in the Antipolo police force in 1934 and became a sergeant on September 1, 1939.
  • He was appointed Chief of Police on March 30, 1958, initially on a temporary basis pending a medical certificate.
  • His appointment was made permanent effective June 19, 1959, by the Commissioner of Civil Service.
  • Tolentino passed the qualifying examination for municipal chief of police on November 23, 1963, with results released on January 31, 1964.
  • On January 22, 1964, he was dismissed by the Mayor, who appointed Jose S. Oliveros in his place, citing lack of civil service eligibility.
  • The dismissal was supported by a second indorsement from the Commissioner of Civil Service, stating Tolentino's last appointment was temporary and could be terminated without cause.
  • Tolentino's civil service eligibility was later canceled due to failure to disclose a prior criminal case in his examination application.
  • The Court of Appeals upheld the dismissal, prompting Tolentino to seek a reversal from the Supreme Court.

Issue:

  • (Unlock)

Ruling:

  • The Supreme Court dismissed Tolentino's petition and affirmed the Court of Appeals' decision dated August 24, 1970.
  • The Court ruled that Tolentino lacked the necessary civil service eli...(Unlock)

Ratio:

  • The Supreme Court's decision was based on civil service laws and the nature of Tolentino's appointments.
  • Tolentino's last appointment was deemed temporary, allowing for dismissal without cause.
  • A permanent appointment requires civil service eligibility, which Tolentino did not have until after his dismissal.
  • The Commissioner of Civi...continue reading

Jur is an AI-powered legal research platform in the Philippines for case digests, summaries, and jurisprudence. AI-generated content may contain inaccuracies; please verify independently.

© 2024 Jur.ph. All rights reserved.