Luego v. CSC

Luego v. CSC

G.R. NO. L-69137 August 5, 1986

Cruz, J.

Facts:

                The petitioner was appointed Administrative Officer 11, Office of the City Mayor, Cebu City, by Mayor Florentino Solon on February 18, 1983. The appointment was described as permanent” but the Civil Service Commission approved it as “temporary,” subject to the final action taken in the protest filed by the private respondent and another employee, and provided “there (was) no pending administrative case against the appointee, no pending protest against the appointment nor any decision by competent authority that will adversely affect the approval of the appointment.” On March 22, 1984, after protracted hearings the legality of which does not have to be decided here, the Civil Service Commission found the private respondent better qualified than the petitioner for the contested position and, accordingly, directed “that Felicula Tuozo be appointed to the position of Administrative Officer 11 in the Administrative Division, Cebu City, in place of Felimon Luego whose appointment as Administrative Officer II is hereby revoked.” The private respondent was so appointed on June 28, 1984, by the new mayor, Mayor Ronald Duterte. The petitioner, invoking his earlier permanent appointment, is now before us to question that order and the private respondent’s title.

Issue:

                Is the Civil Service Commission authorized to disapprove a permanent appointment on the ground that another person is better qualified than the appointee and, on the basis of this finding, order his replacement by the latter?

Held:

                No. The Civil Service Commission is not empowered to determine the kind or nature of the appointment extended by the appointing officer, its authority being limited to approving or reviewing the appointment in the light of the requirements of the Civil Service Law. When the appointee is qualified and authorizing the other legal requirements are satisfied, the Commission has no choice but to attest to the appointment in accordance with the Civil Service Laws.

              Indeed, the approval is more appropriately called an attestation, that is, of the fact that the appointee is qualified for the position to which he has been named. As we have repeatedly held, such attestation is required of the Commissioner of Civil Service merely as a check to assure compliance with Civil Service Laws.