Title
Damasen vs. Tumamao
Case
G.R. No. 173165
Decision Date
Feb 17, 2010
Vacancy in San Isidro Sangguniang Bayan led to conflicting appointments; SC upheld Tumamao's legitimacy over Damasen due to LDP compliance under RA 7160.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 200222)

Factual Background

On December 2, 2004, the Vice-Mayor of San Isidro, Isabela, passed away, creating a permanent vacancy in the position. Ligaya C. Alonzo, as the highest-ranking member of the Sangguniang Bayan, was promoted to Vice-Mayor, creating a subsequent vacancy in the Sangguniang Bayan. In accordance with Section 44 of RA No. 7160, San Isidro Mayor Abraham T. Lim recommended Oscar G. Tumamao for the vacant position to Governor Maria Gracia Cielo M. Padaca. Tumamao was then appointed and took his oath on April 15, 2005. On the other hand, Petitioner Atty. Lucky Damasen became a member of the LDP on May 5, 2005, and he was appointed to the same position in the Sangguniang Bayan by Governor Padaca on May 12, 2005. Upon attending a session the following day, Damasen was not recognized, leading him to file a Petition for Quo Warranto in the RTC.

Proceedings in the Regional Trial Court

Damasen's petition sought to assert his rightful claim to the Sangguniang Bayan position, arguing that his appointment by the Governor and his nomination by LDP Provincial Chairman Ana Benita Balauag were valid. The RTC initially ruled in favor of Damasen, declaring him the rightful member of the Sangguniang Bayan and ordering Tumamao to vacate the position. The RTC based its ruling on Section 45(b) of RA 7160, stating that since Damasen met the qualifications necessary for the position, he was entitled to his rights associated with the office.

Appeal and Court of Appeals Decision

Tumamao appealed the RTC decision to the Court of Appeals (CA), which reversed the lower court’s ruling. The CA found that while Damasen's appointment was made by the Governor, it did not align with the strict requirements of Section 45 of RA 7160. The court emphasized that Damasen's nomination had been revoked by Balauag and questioned the legitimacy of his political affiliation with the LDP, asserting that Balauag was not the "highest official" of the party as required by the law. Consequently, the CA dismissed Damasen's petition and declared that Tumamao was the rightful appointee.

Issues Raised

In his Petition for Review to the Supreme Court, Damasen raised several points of error purportedly made by the CA, including the dismissal of his quo warranto petition based on his alleged non-compliance with the nomination requirements and the lack of ruling on the validity of Tumamao’s assumption of office. Furthermore, Damasen contended that Tumamao had no standing to challenge his appointment.

Supreme Court Analysis

The Supreme Court addressed Damasen's arguments, affirming that Tumamao indeed had the authority to appeal the RTC decision, as the core issue was the rightful occupant of the contested position. The Court reiterated that under the provisions of Section 45(b) of RA 7160, nominees must be endorsed by the "high

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster—building context before diving into full texts.