Marohombsar v. Alonto, Jr.
REITERATIONFacts
The Antecedents: The underlying dispute concerns the removal of Dr. Emily M. Marohombsar from her position as Acting Vice-Chancellor for Academic Affairs of the Mindanao State University (MSU) Marawi Campus. Dr. Marohombsar was initially appointed to this role on January 2, 1989, with her appointment later confirmed by the MSU Board of Regents on May 16, 1989. The MSU President, Ahmad E. Alonto, Jr., sought to remove her from this position, offering her a different role as Vice-President for Academic Affairs, which she declined, wishing to see through projects in her current capacity. Procedural History: Following Dr. Marohombsar's refusal to accept the reassignment, MSU President Alonto designated Professor Macacuna Moslem, who declined, and subsequently designated Professor Corazon Batara as Officer-in-Charge of the Office of the Vice-Chancellor for Academic Affairs via Special Order No. 158-P on May 28, 1990. Dr. Marohombsar challenged this removal, leading the Supreme Court to issue a temporary restraining order on June 21, 1990, enjoining the respondents from enforcing the special order and interfering with her duties. Dr. Marohombsar later filed a motion to cite President Alonto for contempt for allegedly submitting the special order for approval despite the restraining order. The Petition: Dr. Marohombsar petitions the Supreme Court, arguing that her appointment as Acting Vice-Chancellor was permanent and thus she could only be removed for cause after a hearing. She contends that the MSU President's actions, including merging her previous permanent position and offering a less desirable role, were maneuvers to circumvent her security of tenure. The petition further asserts that the Board of Regents' confirmation of her appointment indicated its permanent nature, distinguishing it from a mere designation. The petitioner seeks to have her removal declared unlawful and her tenure as Vice-Chancellor affirmed.
Issue(s)
Whether the petitioner's appointment as Acting Vice-Chancellor for Academic Affairs was permanent or temporary. Whether the respondent President could remove the petitioner from her position without cause. Whether the respondent President's actions constituted contempt of court.
Ruling
The petition is GRANTED. The petitioner shall remain as the lawful occupant in a permanent capacity of the position of Vice-Chancellor for Academic Affairs of MSU Marawi until the end of her three-year term or her tenure is otherwise lawfully terminated. The motion to cite respondent Alonto for contempt is DENIED but the respondent is admonished to faithfully heed court orders in the future. The Temporary Restraining Order issued by this Court on June 21, 1990, is made PERMANENT.
Ratio Decidendi
On the nature of the petitioner's appointment: The Court held that while an acting appointment is generally temporary and revocable without cause, the circumstances surrounding the petitioner's appointment indicated an intent to circumvent the security of tenure principle. The abolition of her permanent position as Vice-President for External Studies and its merger with the OVCAA, followed by her appointment as Acting VCAA, suggested a maneuver to remove her from her permanent status. The confirmation of her appointment by the Board of Regents, coupled with the indefinite nature of the appointment, further supported the view that it was not merely a temporary designation. The Court distinguished between a 'designation,' which is temporary and requires reporting to the Board of Regents, and an 'appointment,' which, especially when confirmed by the Board, can confer permanent status. The fact that the Board of Regents confirmed the petitioner's position indicated it was an ad interim appointment, not a mere designation. A designation, under MSU rules, must be for a period of less than one year and becomes void if not renewed after the Board's meeting, unless the Board acts to fill the item permanently. The Court rejected the argument that the petitioner's permanent status was only as Professor VI, rendering her VCAA position temporary. Citing Tapales v. President and Board of Regents of the University of the Philippines, the Court held that an administrative position, even if held concurrently with a faculty position, can be permanent and enjoys security of tenure. The confirmation by the Board of Regents of her VCAA position, despite her professorial appointment, did not detract from its permanent nature. On the removal without cause: The Court reiterated that the constitutional guarantee of security of tenure cannot be evaded by the guise of temporary or acting appointments. The nature of the functions attached to a position, not its nomenclature, determines its permanence. The respondent President's attempt to convert a permanent position into a temporary one to allow for arbitrary removal was deemed invalid. The Court noted that the Secretary of Education, Culture and Sports also opined that the petitioner could not be removed by the MSU President without the authority of the Board. On the contempt charge: While the respondent President's submission of Special Order No. 158-P to the Board of Regents after the issuance of the TRO was a violation, the Court found that he acted under an honest, albeit mistaken, belief that MSU would progress faster if executive officers served at his pleasure. Therefore, the Court denied the motion to cite him for contempt but admonished him to faithfully obey court orders in the future, emphasizing the importance of respecting restraining orders.
Main Doctrine
An 'acting' appointment, while generally temporary and revocable without cause, cannot be used as a device to circumvent the constitutional guarantee of security of tenure. If the circumstances surrounding the appointment, such as the abolition of a permanent position and the creation of a temporary one to absorb its functions, indicate an intent to remove an employee without cause, the principle of security of tenure prevails.