Title
Perez vs. Provincial Board of Nueva Ecija
Case
G.R. No. L-35474
Decision Date
Mar 29, 1982
Perez, designated acting provincial fiscal, faced opposition from the Provincial Board. His candidacy for mayor forfeited his appointive office, rendering the case moot.
A

Case Summary (G.R. No. L-35474)

Factual Background

When Celestino Juan left the office of provincial fiscal to become a judge, the Secretary of Justice, by Administrative Order No. 388 (September 9, 1971), designated Emilio Cecilio as acting provincial fiscal. On May 10, 1972, President Marcos nominated Honorato Perez for appointment as Provincial Fiscal of Nueva Ecija. Congress adjourned sine die on May 18, 1972, causing that nomination to be by-passed; the President then designated Perez as acting provincial fiscal on May 19, 1972. The Provincial Board adopted Resolution No. 146 and the Governor filed a formal protest with the Commission on Appointments’ Committee on Justice, opposing Perez’s confirmation. The Committee resolved not to recommend confirmation. Perez was again nominated during a special session on June 7, 1972, but Congress again adjourned on June 22, 1972, and the nomination was by-passed. Perez took his oath as acting provincial fiscal on August 11, 1972, and formally assumed office on August 14, 1972. On August 21, 1972, the Provincial Board passed Resolution No. 228 directing the Provincial Treasurer to stop payment of Perez’s salaries. Thereafter, on August 28, 1972, the Provincial Treasurer disapproved Perez’s requisition for office supplies, and the Governor disapproved his salary vouchers.

Procedural Posture and Relief Sought

Perez filed an original action in the Supreme Court seeking certiorari, prohibition, and mandamus: (a) to annul Resolution No. 228 of the Provincial Board dated August 21, 1972; (b) to enjoin the respondents from enforcing and implementing that Resolution; and (c) to compel the respondents to recognize and pay him as acting provincial fiscal. He posed two principal legal questions: (1) whether the Provincial Board had the power to pass a resolution refusing to recognize Perez as acting provincial fiscal notwithstanding his presidential designation and assumption of office; and (2) whether the Provincial Board had authority to adjudicate or pass judgment on the validity of the presidential designation.

Ruling and Disposition

The Supreme Court dismissed the petition as moot and academic without reaching the merits of the legal questions presented. The Court took judicial notice that Perez had filed his certificate of candidacy for mayor of Cabanatuan City in the local elections of January 30, 1980. Citing Section 29 of the Election Code of 1978, the Court held that the filing of a certificate of candidacy by a holder of an appointive office ipso facto causes forfeiture of that office, thereby extinguishing the petitioner’s legal right to the appointive office he sought to protect. Because Perez had forfeited his right to the contested appointive office prior to the Court’s decision, the controversy had become moot and academic. The petition was therefore dismissed and no costs were awarded. The opinion notes Justices Barredo (Chairman), Aquino, De Castro, and Ericta concurred; Justices Concepcion, Jr. and Abad Santos took no part.

Legal Reasoning: Mootness and Forfeiture Under the Election Code

The Court’s dismissal rested solely on the doctrine of mootness coupled with the statutory rule on forfeiture found in Section 29 of the Election Code of 1978. Section 29 provides that any person holding a public appointive office ceases to hold that office automatically on the date he files his certificate of candidacy for an elective post (with a specific exception for Cabinet members subject to presidential pleasure). Where a petitioner’s right to the appointive office has been extinguished by such statutory forfeiture, any judicial action to establish or vindicate that right becom

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster, building context before diving into full texts. AI-powered analysis, always verify critical details.