G.R. No. L-30057 - Aparri vs. Court of Appeals

Case Summary (G.R. No. L-30057)

Facts and Chronology

January 15, 1960: NARRA Board approved Resolution No. 13 (series 1960) appointing Bruno O. Aparri as General Manager and resolving to inform the President of that appointment.
January 22, 1960: Chairman transmitted a letter effecting appointment to take effect January 16, 1960, specifying compensation.
March 15, 1962: NARRA Board approved Resolution No. 24 (series 1962) stating the President’s “desire” to fix the incumbent General Manager’s term to end at close of office hours on March 31, 1962.
March 29, 1962: Petitioner filed petition for mandamus with preliminary injunction in the Court of First Instance of Manila seeking annulment of Resolution No. 24 and a command to allow him to continue in office.
August 8, 1963: Republic Act No. 3844 (Agricultural Land Reform Code) took effect, abolishing NARRA and transferring its functions to the Land Authority (Sec. 73).
October 21, 1963: Court of First Instance dismissed the petition as academic because of the abolition of NARRA.
September 24, 1968: Court of Appeals affirmed dismissal; motion for reconsideration denied January 10, 1969.
Petitioner instituted certiorari to the Supreme Court contesting whether Resolution No. 24 amounted to removal without cause; the Supreme Court affirmed the appellate disposition.

Legal Issue Presented

Whether Board Resolution No. 24 (series 1962), fixing petitioner’s term to end March 31, 1962, constituted a removal or dismissal without cause, thereby entitling petitioner to relief by mandamus and damages.

Holding

The Supreme Court affirmed the Court of Appeals: Resolution No. 24 did not effect a removal without cause; it legally fixed the petitioner’s term of office and his right to hold office expired on March 31, 1962.

Legal Reasoning — Nature of Public Office and Appointments

The Court reiterates established principles: a public office exists only by virtue of law, and generally there is no vested proprietary right or estate in an office or its emoluments (citing Mechem, 42 Am. Jur.).
An appointment is complete only when the statutory prerequisites imposed on the appointing authority have been satisfied; if confirmation or approval by another organ is required, the appointment becomes complete only upon that assent. The decision cites authorities explaining that the last act required of the appointing power must be performed for an appointment to be complete (e.g., People v. Bissell; Molnar v. City of Aurora; State v. Barbour).

Legal Reasoning — Application to Petitioner’s Appointment

Resolution No. 13 (1960) evidenced appointment by the Board but did not reflect presidential approval; it stated only that the Board would inform the President of the appointment. Under Sec. 8(2) of R.A. 1160, presidential approval was a statutory prerequisite. Accordingly, the Court found the original appointment incomplete in formal terms.
Given the deficiency, petitioner’s status prior to Resolution No. 24 is characterized as that of a de facto officer — he assumed duties under color of apparent appointment though the statutory requirement (presidential approval) had not been manifested publicly.

Legal Reasoning — Resolution No. 24 and Fixation of Term

Resolution No. 24 (series 1962) corrected the prior defect by acknowledging “the desire of the Office of the President” to fix the term of the incumbent General Manager to March 31, 1962. The Court treated that act as effectively fixing the term in the manner required by R.A. 1160 (i.e., by the Board subject to the President’s approval/recommendation).
The Court analyzed the legal meaning of “term,” citing authorities: a “term” is a fixed and definite period during which an office may be held, and upon expiration the rights and authority of the officer ipso facto cease unless law authorizes holdover. The fixation of a definite term is a recognized mode of terminating official relations; termination by expiration is not a removal.
Because R.A. 1160 vested power in the Board to fix the term (subject to the required recommendation/approval), and because Resolution No. 24 fixed the term to March 31, 1962, petitioner’s cessation was the natural expiration of his term, not an ouster prior to term completion.

Distinction Between Removal and Expiration of Term

The Court

Case Syllabus (G.R. No. L-30057)

Case Citation, Court, and Date

Reported at 212 Phil. 215, Second Division, G.R. No. L-30057.
Decision promulgated January 31, 1984.
Opinion authored by Justice Makasiar; Justices Concepcion, Jr., Guerrero, Abad Santos, De Castro and Escolin concur; Justice Aquino concurs in the result.

Nature of the Proceeding

Petition for certiorari seeking to review the decision of the then Court of Appeals (now Intermediate Appellate Court) dated September 24, 1968.
The Court of Appeals had affirmed the Court of First Instance’s dismissal of a petition for mandamus filed by petitioner Bruno O. Aparri.
The dispositive portion affirmed by the Court of Appeals: "WHEREFORE, the judgment of the lower court insofar as it decrees the dismissal of the present petition for mandamus is hereby affirmed, without pronouncement as to costs."

Parties and Their Official Capacities

Petitioner: Bruno O. Aparri, who alleged entitlement to continue as General Manager of NARRA.
Respondents: The Court of Appeals and the Land Authority (in substitution for Remedios O. Fortich, as Chairman) and members of the Board of Directors of the defunct National Resettlement and Rehabilitation Administration (NARRA): Angelino M. Banzon, Rafael B. Hilao, Valeriano Plantilla and Severo Yap.
Remedios O. Fortich acted in her capacity as Chairman of the NARRA Board when she issued the appointment letter to petitioner.

Relevant Statutory Framework

Republic Act No. 1160 (approved June 18, 1954) created the National Resettlement and Rehabilitation Administration (NARRA).
- Sec. 2: Creates NARRA as a corporation headed by a General Manager and an Assistant Manager to perform functions under supervision and control of the President, through the Office of Economic Coordinator.
- Sec. 8, paragraph (2): Grants the Board of Directors the power "To appoint and fix the term of office of General Manager . . . subject to the recommendation of the Office of Economic Coordination and the approval of the President of the Philippines . . . The Board, by a majority vote of all members, may, for cause, upon recommendation of the Office of Economic Coordination and with the approval of the President of the Philippines, suspend and/or remove the General Manager and/or the Assistant General Manager."
Republic Act No. 3844 (Agricultural Land Reform Code) took effect on August 8, 1963:
- Sec. 73: Abolished NARRA and transferred its functions and powers to the Land Authority.

Facts — Chronology and Key Acts

January 15, 1960: NARRA Board of Directors adopted Resolution No. 13 (Series of 1960) appointing Bruno O. Aparri as General Manager effective January 16, 1960 and resolving to inform the President of the appointment.
- Resolution No. 13: "RESOLVED, as it is hereby resolved, to appoint Mr. Bruno O. Aparri, as General Manager . . . to take effect on January 16, 1960; RESOLVED FURTHER, as it is hereby resolved, to inform the President of the Philippines of the above appointment of Mr. Aparri."
January 22, 1960: Chairman Remedios O. Fortich transmitted a letter to Bruno O. Aparri appointing him as General Manager with compensation P12,000 per annum, appointment to take effect January 16, 1960; letter referenced "REINSTATEMENT."
March 15, 1962: NARRA Board approved Resolution No. 24 (Series of 1962) after transmission from the Chairman of a communication indicating "the desire of the Office of the President, Malacanang, Manila, to fix the term of office of the incumbent General Manager up to the close of office hours on March 31, 1962."
- Resolution No. 24: "WHEREAS, the Chairman of the Board has transmitted to the Board of Directors the desire of the Office of the President, Malacanang, Manila, to fix the term of office of the incumbent General Manager up to the close of office hours on March 31, 1962 . . . NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED . . . that the Board of Directors hereby fix, as it is hereby fixed, the term of office of the incumbent General Manager . . . to March 31, 1962."
March 29, 1962: Petitioner filed a petition for mandamus with preliminary injunction in the then Court of First Instance of Manila.
- Reliefs sought: annulment of the Board’s March 15, 1962 resolution; command the Board to allow petitioner to continue in office as General Manager until he vacates according to law; recovery of actual damages in the sum of P95,000.00 plus costs.
August 8, 1963: Republic Act No. 3844 (Agricultural Land Reform Code) took effect abolishing NARRA and transferring its functions to the Land Authority.
October 21, 1963: Court of First Instance of Manila dismissed the petition as academic because of RA 3844, without pronouncement as to costs.
September 24, 1968: Court of Appeals affirmed the lower court’s dismissal of the petition for mandamus.
- Court of Appeals reasoning: petitioner accepted an appointment without a fixed term and his appointment was terminable at the pleasure of the appointing power (the Board); when the Board later fixed the term to expire March 31, 1962, the termination was due to expiration of term rather than removal.
Motion for reconsideration before the Court of Appeals denied January 10, 1969.
Petitioner filed certiorari to the Supreme Court on January 20, 1969; initially denied January 27, 1969 for lack of merit; motion for reconsideration granted and petition given due course on February 11, 1969.

Issues Presented

Whether Board Resolution No. 24 (Series of 1962) constituted a removal or dismissal of petitioner without cause.
Whether the appointment of petitioner was complete and whether his tenure was terminated by removal or by expiration of a fixed term.

Holdings

Supreme Court affirmed the decision of the Court of