Title
Atay vs. Deling
Case
G.R. No. L-14580
Decision Date
Apr 30, 1960
Petitioners, temporary non-eligible appointees, were lawfully removed after their appointments expired, as affirmed by the Supreme Court.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 164213)

Petition Background

The petitioners had filed a "petition for mandamus with damages" on December 13, 1957, claiming their removals were unjust. Atay had been appointed as a janitor-guard effective May 16, 1956, while Yamuta, a private provincial guard, received a promotional appointment on July 1, 1957. The removals were commanded by government officials, citing specific termination dates. The petition asserted a violation of the petitioners' rights under the Constitution and civil service rules due to the absence of just cause and a hearing before their dismissals.

Respondents' Motion to Dismiss

Respondents filed a motion to dismiss the petition on December 20, 1957, arguing that the petition lacked a cause of action. Their defense was based on precedents that allowed for the removal of non-civil service eligibles without prior hearings. Petitioners countered that they were classified civil service employees entitled to protections against arbitrary dismissal.

Court Decision and Legal Framework

The Court dismissed the petition on July 30, 1958, referencing established Supreme Court decisions indicating the nature of temporary appointments. Notably, the Revised Administrative Code was applicable, as the new Civil Service Law had not yet taken effect during the period in question. It was determined that both petitioners were not civil service eligibles but held temporary appointments, thus subject to removal by the Governor without cause or hearing after three months of service.

Implications of Temporary Appointments

The court underscored that under Section 682 of the Revised Administrative Code, their appointments could last only up to three months unless otherwise authorized, and that the absence of civil service eligibility rendered them amenable to removal without prior investigation or cause. The petitioners’ assertions about the continuity of their service did not negate the legal stipulations re

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster, building context before diving into full texts. AI-powered analysis, always verify critical details.