Hilario v. Civil Service Commission
REITERATIONFacts
The Antecedents: Petitioner Nescito C. Hilario was appointed City Attorney of Quezon City on August 18, 1986. Upon the assumption of Mayor Ismael Mathay, Jr. on July 24, 1992, he issued a letter to petitioner stating that pursuant to Section 481 of the Local Government Code of 1991, the position of City Legal Officer is co-terminous with the appointing authority, thus considering petitioner resigned as of June 30, 1992. Procedural History: On July 1, 1993, Vice Mayor Charito L. Planas filed a complaint with the Civil Service Commission (CSC) against petitioner for usurpation, grave misconduct, being notoriously undesirable, gross insubordination, and conduct grossly prejudicial to the best interest of the service. The CSC issued Resolution No. 93-4067, holding in abeyance disciplinary action but stating that petitioner should not be allowed to continue holding the position. Petitioner's motion for reconsideration was denied by CSC Resolution No. 94-3336, which also ordered the stoppage of petitioner's salaries. The Petition: Petitioner filed a petition for certiorari seeking to nullify the CSC resolutions, arguing that his position is not confidential and that the CSC has no authority to terminate his services.
Issue(s)
Whether the position of City Legal Officer is confidential in nature. Whether the Civil Service Commission has the authority to remove or terminate the services of the petitioner. Whether the co-terminous provision of the Local Government Code of 1991 applies to incumbents.
Ruling
The petition is dismissed for lack of merit. The Civil Service Commission resolutions are upheld.
Ratio Decidendi
On whether the position of City Legal Officer is confidential in nature: The Court held that the position of City Legal Officer is confidential. While Batas Pambansa Blg. 337 enumerated the qualifications, powers, and duties, it did not remove the confidential nature established by Republic Act No. 5185, which explicitly stated that such positions are created to avail of "trusted services." The Court reiterated its consistent ruling that the City Legal Officer position, akin to the Provincial Attorney, involves a high degree of trust and requires a close relationship with the head of the local government unit. The "trusted services" refer to the highest degree of trust in a lawyer-client relationship. On whether the Civil Service Commission has the authority to remove or terminate the services of the petitioner: The Court affirmed that the CSC has the authority to decide disciplinary cases. Section 47 of the Administrative Code grants the Commission appellate jurisdiction over disciplinary cases and allows it to hear and decide cases filed directly by private citizens. The filing of a complaint by Vice Mayor Planas was within the bounds of the law, and the CSC's determination that petitioner was no longer entitled to hold the position was a valid exercise of its authority under the Administrative Code. On whether the co-terminous provision of the Local Government Code of 1991 applies to incumbents: The Court clarified that the co-terminous provision in the Local Government Code of 1991 (Section 481) is a reiteration of the principle that the position of City Legal Officer is confidential. Therefore, it is inherently co-terminous with the appointing authority, regardless of whether the appointment was made before or after the enactment of the Code. The Court also noted that Mayor Mathay's actions, including the letter considering petitioner resigned and his silence during the CSC proceedings, indicated no intention to retain petitioner in the position.
Main Doctrine
The position of City Legal Officer is considered a confidential position, co-terminous with the appointing authority, and the Civil Service Commission has the authority to decide disciplinary cases involving such positions.