Title
Sta. Maria vs. Lopez
Case
G.R. No. L-30773
Decision Date
Feb 18, 1970
Dean Sta. Maria's transfer as UP College of Education Dean was invalid; Supreme Court ruled it violated his tenure and due process rights.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 191002)

Background of the Dispute: Student Grievances and Administrative Actions

In early 1969, graduate and undergraduate students of the UP College of Education raised multiple demands regarding academic programs, facilities, and administrative practices. A committee comprising students and faculty met with Dean Sta. Maria to address these concerns. The Dean took several steps to accommodate the demands within his powers, recommending improvements in budget, library, faculty appointments, physical facilities, and student housing. However, students contended that some critical demands—such as abolishing the foreign language requirement and comprehensive exams, and establishing clear policies on thesis advising and faculty evaluations—were neglected. Student dissatisfaction intensified, leading to a class boycott beginning July 17, 1969. Despite faculty support of Sta. Maria through votes of confidence, the university’s academic activities were paralyzed by the strike.


The Transfer Order and University’s Justification

On July 23, 1969, UP President Lopez issued Administrative Order 77 transferring Sta. Maria to the Office of the President as Special Assistant with the rank of Dean, without salary reduction, allegedly as an emergency measure in the interest of the service to resolve the campus crisis. Subsequently, Professor Nemesio Ceralde was appointed as acting Dean of the College of Education. President Lopez explained that the transfer aimed to quell the disruption caused by the student strike, as negotiations failed due to students’ refusal to engage further unless Sta. Maria resigned.


Terms of Sta. Maria’s Employment and Security of Tenure

Sta. Maria’s appointment as Dean was for a fixed five-year term “unless sooner terminated,” with rights and obligations governed by the UP rules, the university Charter, and constitutional and legal provisions. The court emphasized that “unless sooner terminated” does not confer a power of removal at will or without cause. Since the fixed term was explicit, removal could only be effected for cause, following notice and hearing, consistent with the principle of security of tenure protected by statutory and constitutional law.


Nature of Transfer vs. Removal

Respondents argued Sta. Maria was not removed but temporarily transferred without reduction in rank or salary, which under the Civil Service Law did not require prior hearing. They characterized the move as non-punitive, even promotional, citing his appointment to a university-wide office with potential for further advancement. They also invoked the emergency situation created by the student strike as justification.

However, the court distinguished transfers from removals: transfers involve movement to a position of equivalent rank and duties without breaking service continuity; removals require a termination of a specific office-held status. A transfer that results in a change of position incompatible with the original office—or aims to effect removal indirectly—requires the employee’s consent or procedural due process. The appointment to Special Assistant with the rank of Dean was held to be effectively a removal since Sta. Maria ceased to be Dean of the College.


Authority and Limits of University Officials

The University Charter vests corporate powers in the Board of Regents and the UP President, including appointment, removal, and temporary assignments. Nonetheless, the court noted a critical distinction between faculty members or professors with unspecified stations (who may be reassigned without consent) and academic officers such as college deans appointed to specific positions with fixed terms, who enjoy security of tenure and may not be removed without due cause and process. The President’s ad interim removal and reassignment of Sta. Maria as Special Assistant without prior hearing contravened these protections.


Analysis of the Transfer’s Permanency and Effect

The court found that the transfer order was permanent in nature, not a temporary detail. The UP President’s own press statements described Sta. Maria’s deanship as his “former position.” The appointment of Ceralde as acting dean confirmed the vacancy of the deanship caused by Sta. Maria’s transfer. Further, the transfer was substantively a demotion; the position of Special Assistant lacked the decisional authority of a dean and was not created by law, unlike the deanship.

Despite retention of the “rank of Dean,” the position was effectively without a college to lead, illustrating an empty and nominal status. Thus, the action amounted to removal without due process.


Due Process and Constitutional Protections

Due process requires that no public officer be removed except for cause and after notice and hearing. The court criticized the UP administration’s summary transfer motivated primarily by student pressure and emergency considerations. It highlighted the fundamental principle that constitutional rights, including security of tenure and fair administrative process, cannot be disregarded even in emergencies.

A declaration of concern by UP faculty emphasized the illegality and unfairness of the transfer, stressing that no formal charges or hearing preceded the removal. The court reaffirmed the importance of “hearing before condemnation” as a constitutional imperative.


Limits of Administrative Summary Actions

Respondents cited precedents allowing immediate administrative actions without prior hearing in cases falling within delegated police power or involving urgent property or regulatory interests. The court rejected this analogy, clarifying that these precedents pertain to summary actions upon scientific or technical determinations, unlike the summary removal of a university dean. The necessity of due process for administrative removals in public employment remained firm.


The Student Strike, Academic Standards, and Administrative Responses

The court acknowledged the right of students to petition and protest but noted limits when such actions impair others’ rights or disrupt institutional functions. The demands involving academic standards regarding foreign language and comprehensive exams lay beyond the Dean’s authority alone and required University Council and Board of Regents approval.

The court expressed understanding of Sta. Maria’s adherence to academic standards despite student dissatisfaction and found insufficient reason for the summary removal. It underscored the importance of rational procedures over capitulation to disruptive pressure.


Exhaustion of Administrative Remedies and Judicial Relief

Sta. Maria petitioned the Board of Regents for reconsideration and investigation but was effectively denied relief when the Board confirmed the new acting Dean and refused to suspend the transfer order. The court held that recourse to administrative remedies was futile under these circumstances, and mandamus was an appropriate remedy to enforce constitutional due process guarantees.


Court’s Holding

The Supreme Court declared the transfer order and the appointment of the acting Dean null and void for violating security of tenure and due process. The University was ordered to restore Sta. Maria to his position as Dean of the



    ...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.