Case Summary (G.R. No. 232769)
Petition Overview
The case revolves around a petition for review on certiorari filed by Marzan against the City Government and officials, following the Court of Appeals' affirmance of the Regional Trial Court's dismissal of her petition for mandamus. The petition sought reinstatement to her former position after her termination due to disapproval of her appointment.
Background and Events Leading to Dispute
Marzan was appointed as Department Head II of the CPDO on January 16, 2008, which was later approved by the Civil Service Commission (CSC) in 2011. On December 1, 2011, while retaining her role as the Zoning Officer, she received a concurrent appointment as City Budget Officer. However, after Mayor Paulino's election in May 2013, her appointment to the City Budget Office was disapproved due to procedural discrepancies. Consequently, the city informed her of her termination effective September 14, 2013, leading Marzan to send inquiries to the CSC regarding her position and the implications of the appointment disapproval.
Legal Proceedings Initiated by Marzan
Frustrated with her termination, Marzan filed a petition for mandamus alleging her right to reinstatement based on her claimed security of tenure. Respondents countered that her appointment as City Budget Officer voided her position at the CPDO and argued that her resort to mandamus was premature since she did not exhaust administrative remedies through the proper CSC processes.
Regional Trial Court's Dismissal
The Regional Trial Court dismissed the petition for mandamus, affirming that Marzan had vacated her prior position with the acceptance of her new role. The RTC ruled that the mayor's discretion regarding appointments allowed the respondents to act as they did, and Marzan failed to exhaust administrative remedies regarding her termination.
Court of Appeals Ruling
Marzan appealed to the Court of Appeals, challenging the lower court's decision and claiming that she was denied a full trial. The CA affirmed the RTC's judgment, emphasizing that a full-blown hearing was not a prerequisite for a mandamus petition and reiterated that Marzan had not exhausted available administrative remedies.
Key Legal Questions
The primary issues for consideration included:
- Whether Marzan's immediate resort to judicial remedies was appropriate.
- Whether a writ of mandamus could compel reinstatement to her former position as Department Head of the CPDO.
Court's Rationale and Decision
The Supreme Court concluded in favor of the respondents, highlighting an exception to the exhaustion of administrative remedies due to the legal nature of the questions raised. However, it ruled against Marzan on the merits of her claim. It clarified that the disapproval of her appointment mechanically terminated her services unless an appeal was fil
...continue readingCase Syllabus (G.R. No. 232769)
The Case
- This case involves a Petition for Review on Certiorari filed under Rule 45 of the Rules of Court.
- The petition challenges the Decision dated October 26, 2016, and the Resolution dated July 4, 2017, issued by the Court of Appeals in CA G.R. SP No. 139549.
- The assailed Decision and Resolution affirm the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Olongapo City, Branch 72's dismissal of Marzan's Petition for Mandamus and subsequent motion for reconsideration.
The Facts
- Marey Beth D. Marzan was appointed as City Government Department Head II of the City Planning and Development Office (CPDO) on January 16, 2008.
- Her appointment was issued by then-City Mayor James Gordon, Jr., and approved by the Civil Service Commission (CSC) on June 7, 2011.
- On December 1, 2011, Marzan was appointed as City Budget Officer of the City Budget Office (CBO), a position she was to hold concurrently with her role as Zoning Administrator/Zoning Officer.
- Upon Mayor Paulino's election on May 6, 2013, he appointed Tony Kar Balde III to Marzan's previous position as Department Head II of the CPDO.
- The CSC disapproved Marzan's appointment to the CBO on August 16, 2013, citing discrepancies in the approval dates.
- Following the disapproval, the City Government issued a termination letter to Marzan on August 29, 2013, effective September 14, 2013.
- Marzan sought clarification from the CSC regarding her employment status post-termination and continued to report for work despite being informed of her termination.
- On September 13, 2013, Marzan communicated with May