G.R. No. L-20864 - Valencia vs. Peralta, Jr.

This is a quo warranto proceeding involving the position of Chairman of the Board of Directors of the National Waterworks and Sewerage Authority (NAWASA).
The dispute concerns the legality of conflicting appointments made by successive Presidents.

On October 4, 1961, President Carlos P. Garcia designated Elpidio Valencia as “Acting Chairman” of NAWASA’s Board of Directors.
Based on information that he was extended an ad-interim appointment, petitioner took an oath of office on October 25, 1961 before President Garcia, subscribing to the usual form and substance of such oaths.
The oath indicated an assumption of the position in an “acting” capacity, though petitioner later argued this implied a permanent appointment with a term fixed by Republic Act No. 1383.

On April 27, 1962, the Commission on Appointments confirmed petitioner’s appointment as Chairman for a term expiring July 20, 1967.
Contemporaneously, on November 6, 1961, a written appointment was allegedly prepared for petitioner, as evidenced by the letter of transmission received by the Commission.
On June 2, 1962, however, President Diosdado Macapagal appointed Macario Peralta, Jr. as ad-interim Chairman of NAWASA, effectively superseding petitioner’s status.
Petitioner ceased attending Board meetings following the conflicting appointment and, on February 9, 1963, instituted the present petition challenging the legality of respondent’s appointment.

The Solicitor General argued that petitioner’s designation was strictly “acting” and temporary, not amounting to a formal ad-interim appointment.
It was contended that:

The petitioner never received a valid ad-interim appointment in writing, despite taking an oath to that effect.
The confirmation by the Commission on Appointments did not confer any permanent title because no valid or written appointment existed.
An unreleased draft appointment (dated November 6, 1961 and processed on December 25, 1961) could not create title as it was never formally transmitted or executed, particularly in light of Administrative Order No. 2 withdrawing “midnight appointments.”

The record shows only one written designation for petitioner—a designation as Acting Chairman on October 4, 1961, which was inherently revocable and temporary.

Whether petitioner’s designation as Acting Chairman and his subsequent oath of office constituted a valid ad-interim appointment, entitling him to a permanent tenure as provided under Republic Act No. 1383.
Whether the confirmation by the Commission on Appointments of an appointment supposedly dated November 6, 1961, could remedy the lack of a clear and genuine nomination.

Whether the appointment of Macario Peralta, Jr. as ad-interim Chairman by President Macapagal effectively nullified any claim of title to office made by petitioner.
Whether the existence of two conflicting appointments for the same position allowed for one to override the other, particularly considering the temporary nature of an "Acting" appointment.

Whether the absence of a formal, written commission or document clearly evidencing a permanent appointment undermines the petitioner’s claim to title and tenure in the office.
How the inconsistencies between the oath taken and the documented dates of appointment affect the legal validity of the petitioner’s claim.