Title
La Carlota City, Negros Occidental vs. Rojo
Case
G.R. No. 181367
Decision Date
Apr 24, 2012
Vice-Mayor appoints Atty. Rojo as Sanggunian Secretary post-resignation; CSC and courts uphold appointment, citing valid quorum, qualifications, and compliance with rules.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 181367)

Facts

On March 18, 2004, Atty. Rex G. Rojo was appointed as Sangguniang Panlungsod Secretary by Vice-Mayor Rex R. Jalandoon following Rojo's resignation from the Sangguniang Panlungsod. The Civil Service Commission (CSC) raised issues regarding the appointment's documentation. The CSC denied the appointment due to perceived deficiencies and subsequently deemed it withdrawn. City officials contested Jalandoon’s standing to appeal this decision, arguing that Rojo should be considered the real party in interest in the matter. The Civil Service Commission Regional Office approved Rojo's appointment later due to sufficient compliance with requirements after an appeal.

Rulings of the Civil Service Commission

The CSC Regional Office reversed the initial denial of Rojo's appointment, citing that the Vice-Mayor acted within his authority and the appointment met compliance with the necessary prerequisites. Following an appeal by the new city administration, the CSC dismissed the petitioners' case due to their lack of standing, affirming that only the appointing authority could contest the appointment's validity. This led to the petitioners taking their case to the Court of Appeals.

Court of Appeals Decision

The Court of Appeals upheld the CSC, emphasizing that the Civil Service Commission’s role in attesting appointments is limited to verifying eligibility and qualifications. The Court found that Rojo met all qualifications for the position, and that any procedural shortcomings in the appointment process did not substantiate disapproval. The Court ruled that the lack of a signature from the Human Resource Management Officer did not invalidate the appointment as it would unfairly constrain the appointing authority.

Issues Raised

The petitioners contested the validity of Rojo's appointment on two grounds: whether the appointment violated the constitutional restriction on the appointment of an elected official during their term, and whether the appointment contravened existing civil service rules. They argued that Rojo’s resignation was ineffective due to a lack of quorum when it was presented to the assembly and thus, he was still an incumbent at the time of his appointment.

Interpretation of Legal Provisions

The court examined relevant provisions from the Local Government Code, asserting that resignations must be accepted during a session with a quorum present. Section 82 of the Local Government Code specifies the authorities that must accept resignations of elective officials. Consequently, the court assessed whether the presence of the Vice-Mayor as presiding officer counted towards quorum. The petitioners argued that without him, the body lacked the necessary seven members for quorum, while Rojo maintained that the Vice-Mayor should be considered in the quorum count, leading to a valid acceptance of his resignation.

Conclusion of the Court

The Court ruled affirmatively on the validity of Rojo’s appointment, concluding that s

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur is a legal research platform serving the Philippines with case digests and jurisprudence resources.