Facts:
Executive Order No. 285, issued on July 25, 1987, abolished the General Services Administration, including all offices and agencies under it, and in the process the General Printing Office, which was under the GSA, was merged with the relevant printing units of the Philippine Information Agency, from which merger the National Printing Office (NPO) was formed and placed under the control and supervision of the Office of the Press Secretary. A new plantilla of personnel was prepared and approved, and the affected officers and employees continued to discharge their duties in a hold-over capacity pending implementation of the reorganization.
Melanio S. Torio served as Chief of the Production Staff of the Printing Division, PIA, while
Jaime Espanola served as a Bindery Foreman at the PIA. After the PIA was merged with the GSA, both petitioners continued functioning in hold-over capacity. On March 1, 1988, Torio was temporarily appointed as Assistant Operations Superintendent of Printing while Espanola was temporarily appointed as Temporary Supervising Bookbinder; both temporary appointments lapsed on February 28, 1989. On March 1, 1989, Torio received a renewal temporary appointment, while Espanola was issued another appointment as Supervising Bookbinder with
permanent status and was simultaneously granted a testimonial eligibility. On July 1, 1989, the positions of both petitioners were upgraded: Torio’s Assistant Operations Superintendent of Printing became Assistant Superintendent of Printing, and Espanola’s Supervising Bookbinder became Bookbinder IV; Torio then received a new appointment for the upgraded position together with a change from temporary to permanent status, whereas Espanola was only issued a notice of upgrading because he already held the upgraded item in a permanent capacity. Protests were lodged with the Civil Service Commission (CSC) by private respondents
Efren Camacho (in Torio’s case) and
Letty Cangayda (in Espanola’s case). The CSC referred Camacho’s protest to the NPO and referred Cangayda’s protest to the Reorganization Appeals Board of the Office of the Press Secretary; no action was taken on these referrals, prompting the CSC to resolve the protests based on available documents. On January 7, 1991, the CSC issued a resolution in CSC Case No. 796 revoking Torio’s appointment and ordering qualified persons, including Camacho, to be evaluated for the position; on February 5, 1991, it issued a resolution in CSC Case No. 832 cancelling Espanola’s appointment and ordering the reappointment of Cangayda to the position. Separate motions for reconsideration were denied for lack of merit, leading to the consolidated petitions assailing the CSC resolutions, with a temporary restraining order later issued. Torio argued that at the time of his appointment he already had civil service eligibility obtained from the July 26, 1987 career service professional examination whose results were released on January 13, 1988, that Camacho’s protest had become moot because it attacked a temporary appointment that had already expired, and that his removal would violate security of tenure. Camacho maintained that the CSC could review appointments and correct approval or disapproval mistakes, and argued that there were qualified eligibles not considered. Espanola claimed he possessed the qualifications for Supervising Bookbinder (now Bookbinder IV), that he had more than ten years of relevant experience, that his appointment had been approved by the CSC and thus could not be withdrawn or cancelled, and that his protest issue was moot and barred by security of tenure concerns. Cangayda contended that Espanola’s appointment violated
Republic Act No. 6656, that she was entitled to be appointed to the same item in the same capacity due to her prior permanent status, and that Espanola was not qualified because he lacked the required civil service eligibility at the time of his appointment while a qualified eligible was allegedly available. The CSC’s challenged resolutions were anchored on the petitioners’ alleged lack of civil service eligibility at the time the appointments were issued, and it treated subsequent acquisition of eligibility as immaterial because the “reckoning point” was the date of appointment.
Issues:
Whether the CSC committed reversible error in revoking the petitioners’ appointments for alleged lack of civil service eligibility at the time of issuance and in cancelling Espanola’s permanent appointment in light of the reorganization and the protests filed by the private respondents.
Ruling:
Ratio:
Doctrine: