Conrado L. De Rama, petitioner,
vs. The Court Of Appeals
(Ninth Division, The Civil Service Commission), Eladio Martinez, Divino De Jesus,
Morell Ayala, Aristeo Catalla, Daisy Porta, Flordeliza Oriasel, Graciela Glory,
Felecidad Orinday, Ma. Petra Muffet Luce, Elsa Marino, Bernardita Mendoza, Jane
Macatangay, Adelfo Glodoviza and Florino Ramos, respondents.
Facts: Upon
his assumption to the position of Mayor of Pagbilao, Quezon, petitioner Conrado
L. de Rama wrote a letter dated July 13, 1995 to the Civil Service Commission
(or CSC), seeking the recall of the appointments of fourteen (14) municipal
employees. Justifying his recall request on the allegation that the
appointments of the said employees were “midnight” appointments of the former
mayor, Ma. Evelyn S. Abeja, done in violation of Article VII, Section 15 of the
1987 Constitution. The CSC denied petitioner’s request for the recall of the
appointments of the fourteen employees, for lack of merit. The CSC upheld the
validity of the appointments on the ground that they had already been approved
by the Head of the CSC Field Office in Lucena City, and for petitioner’s
failure to present evidence that would warrant the revocation or recall of the
said appointments.
Issue: whether or not the recall made by petitioner
is valid.
Ruling: No. It is the CSC that is authorized to
recall an appointment initially approved, but only when such appointment and
approval are proven to be in disregard of applicable provisions of the civil
service law and regulations. Rule V, Section 9 of the Omnibus Implementing
Regulations of the Revised Administrative Code specifically provides that “an
appointment accepted by the appointee cannot be withdrawn or revoked by the
appointing authority and shall remain in force and in effect until disapproved
by the Commission.
Accordingly, the
appointments of the private respondents may only be recalled on the following
grounds: (a) Non-compliance with
the procedures/criteria provided in the agency’s Merit Promotion Plan; (b) Failure to pass through the agency’s
Selection/Promotion Board; (c) Violation
of the existing collective agreement between management and employees relative
to promotion; or (d) Violation of
other existing civil service law, rules and regulations.
No comments:
Post a Comment