G.R. No. L-6898 - Manalang vs. Quitoriano

Case Summary (G.R. No. L-6898)

Applicable Law and Legislative Background

The legal basis revolves around Republic Act No. 761, enacted on June 20, 1952, which established the National Employment Service under the Department of Labor, creating the office of the Commissioner and Deputy Commissioner. The Commissioner is appointed by the President with the Commission on Appointments’ consent. Prior to this, Executive Order No. 392 (December 31, 1950) had created the Placement Bureau, directed by Manalang.

Petitioner's Claim and Appointment Recommendations

Petitioner Luis Manalang was recommended for the Commissioner post first by Secretary of Labor Jose Figueras (June 1, 1953) and later by Acting Secretary of Labor Aurelio Quitoriano (June 29, 1953). Although informed that he might be appointed Commissioner, on July 1, 1953, Quitoriano was designated and sworn in as Acting Commissioner, a designation later followed by the appointments of Morabe and de Venancio, all challenged by Manalang as illegal removals without cause.

Legal Issue: Whether Petitioner Was Removed or Entitled to the Office

The Court found that Manalang had never been Commissioner of the National Employment Service; thus, he could not have been removed from an office he did not hold. The concept of removal presupposes the existence and prior holding of an office, which was not applicable because the Placement Bureau, held by Manalang, was expressly abolished by Republic Act No. 761. Consequently, his office was extinguished, negating his claim for protection under the constitutional prohibition against removal without cause (Art. XII, Sec. 4, 1935 Constitution).

Legislative Intent: Abolition of Placement Bureau vs. Creation of National Employment Service

Manalang argued that the Placement Bureau’s functions continued in the National Employment Service, implying continuity of office. However, Republic Act No. 761 explicitly abolished the Placement Bureau and transferred its personnel and assets to the new Service, reflecting that the NES is a new, distinct entity. Transfer of personnel and resources indicates separation of offices, not mere renaming or continuation.

Appointment Requirements under Republic Act No. 761

Manalang’s argument that he automatically succeeded as Commissioner by operation of law was inconsistent with his own pleadings where he admitted the necessity of a new appointment to become Commissioner. Republic Act No. 761 requires that the Commissioner be appointed by the President with the Commission on Appointments’ consent, which had not occurred in his favor. The provision transferring "qualified personnel" does not include the heads of offices, as such officials require formal appointment. The phrase refers generally to subordinate personnel, not directors or commissioners.

Discretion of the President in Appointment Powers

Congress cannot delegate or impose limitations on the President’s exclusive appointing power except as provided by law (such as consent by the Commission on Appointments). Thus, legislative or judicial imposition of automatic succession to the Commissioner’s office is proscribed.

Petitioner’s Service Record and Court’s Consideration

The Court took note of Manalang’s long career in various labor service positions, recognizing his qualifications and years of government service. Though the Court sympathized, it held that neither equity nor past service could override the legal requirements for appointment. The Court even considered the possibility of appointment to the Deputy Commissioner’s position but found it outside the scope of the quo warranto proceeding.

Final Ruling

The petition was dismissed, and the requested writ denied. The Cour

Case Syllabus (G.R. No. L-6898)

Background and Parties Involved

Petitioner Luis Manalang filed quo warranto proceedings contesting the title of the incumbent Commissioner of the National Employment Service.
Manalang claimed he was entitled to possession of the office.
Aurelio Quitoriano was the original respondent, holding the office since July 1, 1953, upon designation as Acting Commissioner by the Office of the President.
Respondents Emiliano Morabe and Mohamad de Venancio were later added after being respectively designated as Acting Commissioners on September 11, 1953, and January 11, 1954.
Zosimo G. Linato was included to restrain him from disbursing the Commissioner’s salary to Morabe.

Legal and Statutory Framework

The Placement Bureau, headed by Manalang as Director, was created by Executive Order No. 392 on December 31, 1950, pursuant to presidential powers under Republic Act No. 422.
Republic Act No. 761, approved June 20, 1952, established the National Employment Service (NES) to organize the employment market as part of the national program for employment and productive resource development.
The NES was placed under the executive supervision and control of the Department of Labor, headed by a Commissioner appointed by the President with the Commission on Appointments’ consent.
The Republic Act expressly abolished the Placement Bureau and the existing Employment Office in the Commission of Social Welfare upon the NES’s organization.

Chronology of Events and Applications for Appointment

On June 1, 1953, Jose Figueras, Secretary of Labor, recommended Luis Manalang for Commissioner.
On June 29, 1953, Aurelio Quitoriano, Acting Secretary of Labor, also recommended Manalang, citing his qualifications and loyalty.
Despite these recommendations, on July 1, 1953, Quitoriano was himself designated and sworn in as Acting Commissioner.
Manalang later included Morabe and de Venancio as respondents due to their subsequent appointments as Acting Commissioners.
Manalang claimed these appointments were illegal removals of his rightful office.

Issues on the Nature of the Office and Removal

The Court found that Manalang had never been appointed Commissioner of the NES, thus he was not removed from the office he never held.
Removal implies ouster from an existing office; since the Placement Bureau and thus the Director’s office were abolished by Republic Act No. 761, there was no existing office to remove Manalang from.
The constitutional provision against removal or suspension without cause (Article XII, Section 4 of the 1935 Constitution) was not applicable because Manalang’s position was extinguished by legislative abolition, a valid exercise of congressional power.

Legislative Intent on Abolition of Placement Bureau

The key legislative provision (second par