Title
Salazar vs. Mathay, Sr.
Case
G.R. No. L-44061
Decision Date
Sep 30, 1976
Salazar, a "confidential agent," was terminated, accepted a lower role, and sought reinstatement. The Court ruled her termination valid, citing the position's confidential nature and her abandonment by accepting the new role.

Case Summary (G.R. No. L-44061)

Employment Background

Salazar's career began on January 20, 1960, when she was appointed as a confidential agent at an annual salary of P3,120. Over the years, her position was promoted, and her salary was adjusted multiple times, culminating in a salary of P5,500 as of July 1, 1965. On March 18, 1966, Salazar was informed that her services had been terminated effective March 31, 1966, a notice she received with surprise.

Appointment to Junior Examiner

Coinciding with her termination, on March 31, 1966, Salazar accepted an appointment as a Junior Examiner in the same office, with a reduced salary of P2,400. This appointment was noted and approved by the Commissioner of Civil Service, despite it being specified that general clerical eligibility was not suitable for the role.

Request for Reinstatement

On December 27, 1966, Salazar requested her reinstatement as a confidential agent. Following the lack of action on her request, she filed a petition for mandamus with the Supreme Court, seeking to compel her reinstatement. The Supreme Court dismissed her petition but permitted her to file the proper action in the Court of First Instance.

Legal Framework and Confidential Position

The central legal issue pertains to whether Salazar's role as a confidential agent was validly terminated. Under prevailing laws, positions can be deemed primarily confidential if declared as such by the President, or if the nature of the position inherently entails close intimacy with the appointing authority. The relevant Executive Order declared that confidential agents are primarily confidential roles, allowing their termination at the discretion of the appointing power.

Termination Rationale

Since Salazar's position was categorized under the primarily confidential classification, her termination did not violate her security of tenure. The court underscored that employees in such capacities serve at the pleasure of their appointing authority, and their dismissal does not equate to a formal removal but rather an expiration of their term of office.

Abandonment of Position

Moreover, even if her termination was considered improper, her acceptance o

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur is a legal research platform serving the Philippines with case digests and jurisprudence resources. AI digests are study aids only—use responsibly.