Case Summary (G.R. No. 131954)
Background and Applicable Law
Following the reclassification of employee positions in the MCWD in 1995 to align with civil service descriptions and salary grades, petitioners applied for promotional permanent appointments. Their appointments were disapproved by the CSC Field Office on the basis that the position applied for was "primarily confidential" and "co-terminous," a ruling sustained through the CSC Regional Office and the CSC proper by Resolution No. 972512. The relevant legal basis includes CSC Memorandum Circular No. 22, Series of 1991, the Civil Service Decree (P.D. 807), particularly Section 6, Article IV, defining the non-career service and Section 12, Chapter 3, Book V of the 1987 Administrative Code on the CSC’s power to classify positions. The 1987 Philippine Constitution is the fundamental law underpinning the decision.
Substance of the CSC Memorandum Circular No. 22, Series of 1991
Memorandum Circular No. 22 classified all private secretary positions across government agencies as primarily confidential positions, the incumbency of which is co-terminous with the appointing official they serve. The Circular explained that while a prior circular (Memorandum Circular No. 14, 1987) identified primarily confidential positions only in offices of elective officials, department heads, and officials of cabinet rank, the updated circular expanded this classification uniformly to similar positions regardless of their location for consistency. It also provided that holders of private secretary positions with previous permanent appointments retain their status until vacancy, with agencies wishing to maintain these positions in the career service advised to request position title changes.
Petitioners’ Arguments
Petitioners assailed the validity of Memorandum Circular No. 22, arguing it unduly amended and expanded the non-career service enumeration under Section 6, Article IV of P.D. 807, effectively amending the law beyond the CSC’s rule-making authority. They claimed the CSC exceeded its powers in classifying private secretary positions as primarily confidential and thus co-terminous, rendering the circular and Resolution No. 972512 void.
Supreme Court’s Legal Analysis: Scope of Judicial Review
The Court reiterated the limited scope of a special civil action under Rule 65, which restricts review to cases of grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction. Mere errors of judgment or discretion not rising to grave abuse do not warrant annulment of administrative issuances. The petitioners bore the burden of proving such grave abuse of discretion by the CSC.
Regulatory Power of the Civil Service Commission
The Court emphasized that the CSC is expressly empowered under Section 12, Chapter 3, Book V of the 1987 Administrative Code to declare positions as primarily confidential. This power includes supplementing statutory enumerations of non-career positions, indicating that the list in Section 6, Article IV of the Civil Service Decree is not exclusive. The CSC’s classification of private secretary positions—whether located in offices not previously enumerated—as primarily confidential was therefore a valid exercise of delegated authority
...continue readingCase Syllabus (G.R. No. 131954)
Facts of the Case
- Petitioners Asela B. Montecillo, Marilou Joan V. Ortega, and Charrishe Dosdos were employees of the Metropolitan Cebu Water District (MCWD), holding the positions of "Department Secretary" for six to seven years.
- The MCWD's personnel structure underwent reclassification in late 1995 to conform with Civil Service descriptions and salary grades, following the precedent set in Davao City Water District vs. Civil Service Commission.
- Petitioners applied for promotional appointments to the position of "Secretary to the Assistant General Manager" or "Private Secretary C."
- MCWD General Manager Dulce Abanilla forwarded their appointments to the Civil Service Commission Field Office (CSC FO) for approval.
- The CSC FO refused to approve the appointments as "permanent," ruling that the "Private Secretary C" position was "primarily confidential" and "co-terminous."
- This ruling was upheld by the CSC Regional Office and later affirmed on appeal by the Civil Service Commission through Resolution No. 972512.
Issue Presented
- Whether the issuance of Civil Service Commission Memorandum Circular No. 22, Series of 1991, which classified all "Private Secretary" positions as primarily confidential and coterminous regardless of location, was valid or an abuse of discretion by the Civil Service Commission.
- Whether the CSC’s Circular unduly expanded or amended the scope of the non-career service, thus exceeding CSC’s delegated power to promulgate rules and regulations under the Civil Service Law.
- Whether the CSC committed grave abuse of discretion in denying petitioners permanent appointments under said Circular.
Civil Service Commission Memorandum Circular No. 22, Series of 1991
- This Circular declared all "Private Secretary" positions, irrespective of their locations, as primarily confidential in nature, making the tenure coterminous with the official served.
- It clarified the application of Memorandum Circular No. 14, s. 1987, which identified primarily confidential positions including Private Secretaries in offices of elective officials and Cabinet rank officials.
- The Circular declared the term of office for Private Secretaries to be co-terminous with their appointing official.
- Incumbents with permanent appointments prior to the Circular’s issuance retained their permanent status until the positions were vacated.
- It advised agency heads who wished to retain Private Secretary positions in the career service to request reclassification of those positions as "Secretary" from the Department of Budget and Management for proper designation.
Petitioners' Contentions
- Petitioners argued that the Memorandum Circular No. 22 unduly amended and expanded the non-career service classification under Section 6, Article IV of the Civil Service Decree (P.D. 807).
- They contended that the