Title
Supreme Court
Agyao, Jr. vs. Civil Service Commission
Case
G.R. No. 182591
Decision Date
Jan 18, 2011
Agyao’s re-appointment as PEZA Department Manager II was invalidated by CSC for lacking CESO/CSEE eligibility. SC reversed, ruling the position non-CES, not requiring presidential appointment or CESO/CSEE eligibility.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 182591)

Appointment Background

On June 16, 2004, Agyao was re-appointed as Department Manager II of PEZA, a position where he was subject to Civil Service regulations. Shortly after his re-appointment, on July 16, 2004, the CSC Field Office for the Bangko Sentral Ng Pilipinas (CSCFO-BSP) invalidated Agyao's appointment on the basis that he lacked the necessary Career Executive Service eligibility.

Compliance with CSC Rules

Per Section 2(b), Rule III of CSC Memorandum Circular No. 40, Series of 1998, temporary appointments can only be issued if the individual meets educational requirements but lacks eligibility, and only in the absence of a qualified candidate. In Agyao's case, the CSCFO-BSP indicated that qualified applicants were indeed available.

Dynamics of Appeal and Decision

PEZA's Director-General, Lilia B. De Lima, appealed the CSC's decision on August 31, 2004, attempting to secure reconsideration. However, on June 16, 2005, the CSC affirmatively denied the appeal, highlighting that Agyao had received multiple temporary appointments without obtaining the requisite CESO or CSEE eligibility.

Subsequent Developments

Agyao was informed of his new appointment as Division Chief III, permanent, effective July 16, 2005. He filed a motion for reconsideration with the CSC, which was also denied on October 17, 2005. Pursuing further recourse, Agyao appealed to the Court of Appeals (CA), which ultimately affirmed the CSC's prior decisions.

Central Legal Issues

Agyao primarily contended two issues: whether the CA erred in upholding the CSC's invalidation of his appointment, and whether the Department Manager II position falls outside Career Executive Service requirements based on his claims of not being a presidential appointee.

Parties' Arguments

Agyao argued for the applicability of CSC MC No. 9, Series of 2005, which he interpreted as allowing for his appointment's renewal based on a lack of qualified applicants. Conversely, the CSC maintained that Agyao's appointment was invalidated correctly due to his failure to obtain requisite qualifications and that their regulations were not retroactive.

Court Findings on Third Level Eligibility

The Supreme Court focused on whether the Department Manager II position required CES eligibility. Citing precedents including Office of the Ombudsman v. Civil Service Commission and Home Insurance Guarantee Corporation v. Civil Service Commission, the Court established that positions in the Career Executive Service comprise only those appointed by the President.

Implications for the Department Manager II Position

The Court concluded that Agyao's position did not require a presidential appointment, thereby exempting it from the

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur is a legal research platform serving the Philippines with case digests and jurisprudence resources. AI digests are study aids only—use responsibly.