G. R. No. L-9912. May 23, 1957

On  June  5, 1951, petitioner Romulo  Cuyo, a regular member of the  Baguio  Police Department since February 20, 1946, was  suspended from  office pending investigation, by councilor Luis  Lardizabal   of  the City  of  Baguio, of the administrative  charges preferred against him  (Cuyo) by the then  City Mayor,  involving  alleged  irregularities in the performance of his  duties and violation  of law and duty, said to  have been committed as follows:

“December 31,  1946, Administrative charge filed against him for Insubordination  and Reprehensible  Conduct;
“October 21, 1948, Conduct “Unbecoming a Peace Officer,  for which he was reprimanded and warned;
“April  16,  1951, Telling a Lie, for  which he  was  severely reprimanded;
“May 13, 1961, Abandoning  his Post  Without Proper Relief  and Authority; and
“May  16, 1951, Absent  Without  Leave  (AWOL).”  (Folder of Exhibits,  p. 5.)

In line with  the report of  the  investigation  conducted by said councilor, who found Cuyo guilty of said charges,  on July 20, 1951, the City Council of Baguio passed Resolution No. 204 ordering  his  dismissal effective on June  5, 1951.   On appeal taken therefrom, the  Civil Service Commissioner, in a decision  dated December 20,  1951, held—- after  considering  that  Cuyo had  already  been  punished for the individual offenses aforementioned, and that, being responsible for the maintenance  of peace and order in the City  of  Baguio, the  City Council  and  its Mayor should have some discretion  in  the  choice of the members  of its police forces—that said officers of the City were  not guilty of abuse of discretion and that there was “nothing reversible” in said resolution of the City  Council.   The  dis- positive  part of said decision, however, reads:

“Wherefore, and in line with  the action taken  by this Office  in the case  of Patrolman Quintin Bugasto of the same organization, respondent-appellant Cuyo should be, as he  is hereby  transferred to  another branch  of the Baguio  City Government.  The decision ordering his dismissal from  the service  is thus modified.”  (Folder of  Exhibits, p. 11.)

A  reconsideration   of  this decision was  denied by the Commissioner of Civil  Service  on March  13,  1952.  On August  1, 1955,  Cuyo instituted  the present action, for mandamus and damages, in the Court of First Instance of Baguio,  against its Mayor, Council and  Treasurer.  In his petition he  prays:

“(1) that the investigation  had, and  the  decision  made in the administrative charge against the petitioner be declared  illegal, null and void ab ibtio;
“(2) that the respondent City Mayor of Eaguio be  ordered  to reinstate  the  petitioner  as  member  of the  Baguio  City  Police Department;
“(3) that the respondents  be  ordered to pay to the petitioner his salary from June 5,  1951, until actually  reinstated;
“(4) that the respondents  be condemned to  pay to the petitioner the sum of P1,000.00 as  attorney’s fees,  plus the costs of this suit; and
 “(5) that the petitioner be granted all reliefs and remedies deemed just and equitable in the premises.”

In  due course,  said  court rendered a decision, the  dispositive  part of which follows:

“Judgment is,  therefore,  rendered against Respondents, ordering them to place Petitioner  in  another branch of the City  Government;  Petitioner shall be  entitled  to his back  pay as policeman from June 5, 1051;  No attorney’s  fees  are awarded Petitioner as this is a  case of good faith on the part of Respondents; No special pronouncement as to costs.”

The case is  now before us on appeal taken by the respondents.  Petitioner  maintains that his dismissal by the City  Council of Baguio is null and  void, the administrative charges  preferred against  him having been  investigated,  not by said Council, but by  one of  its members, in violation of Republic Act No.  557, as construed in Festejo vs.  Municipal Mayor  of  Nabua  (96  Phil., 286, 51 Off. Gaz., 121).   Indeed,  we  have  repeatedly  held that administrative charges against members of the local police force  must,  pursuant  to  Republic Act  No.  557,  be investigated by the Municipal  or City  Council,  and that an investigation conducted by,  either a  member, or a committee thereof, is null  and void,  even if the  Council shall have  approved the action and recommendation  of  its investigating member or committee (see Covacha vs. Amante, L-8358,  May 25, 1956; Carmona vs. Amante,  99  Phil., 716; Senarillos vs.  Hermosisima, 100 Phil., 501,  53  Off.  Gaz., [4] 1043).
 
It  is,  also,  settled, however, that the reinstatement of an  officer illegally dismissed may not be secured by mandamus,  if the  action therefor is  filed over  one (1) year after his dismissal.  The reason for this rule is that the right to a public office may be lost by abandonment thereof, which may be deduced from his failure to seek reinstatement within said  period of one (1) year (Florentino Jose, Jr., vs. Arsenio H. Lacson, L-10477, May 17,  1957; Unabia vs.  Hon. City  Mayor,  99  Phil., 253), and  that “it  is not proper  that the title to public office should be subjected to  continued  uncertainty, and people’s  interest requires that such right should be determined as speedily as practicable” (Tumulak vs. Egay,  82 Phil., 828,  48 Off.  Gaz., 3693, 3695).

In the case at bar, Cuyo’s motion for reconsideration of the  decision of the Commissioner of Civil Service, substantially affirming the action taken by the City Council of Bagnio, was denied by  said officer  on March  13, 1952. Although the resolution  of said Council, dismissing Cuyo, was modified by the  Commissioner of  Civil Service, in  the sense that petitioner  “should be,  as he is hereby transferred to another branch of the Baguio  City Government,”  the latter,  seemingly, understood the decision of said Commissioner  as sustaining the removal of Cuyo from the police force.  What is more, said decision, as well  as  the attitude or inaction of the City Government of Baguio, was  similarly construed by the petitioner, for, in his petition herein, Cuyo alleges that  he “should not have been separated as member of  the police force  of  the City  of  Baguio, until and unless he is ‘transferred to another branch of the City Government of Baguio in accordance  with the decision of the Commissioner of Civil Service” (paragraph VII), and that “respondents  failed and  still fail, neglected and  still neglect, refused and still refuse to reinstate  the petitioner to his  position as member of the Baguio City Police Department”  (paragraph VIII).   In other words,  Cuyo  understood the aforementioned  decision  as authorizing  his dismissal from said  department, upon his transfer to  another branch  of the City Government, and regarded  the action  taken by the latter as amounting to his removal from the police force, prior to said transfer, and, yet,  he did not bring this  case  until August 1,  1955,  or about three  (3)  years and live (5) months after the  denial of his aforesaid motion for  reconsideration.  Hence,  regardless  of the legality or  illegality  of  the  aforementioned  resolution of the  City Council of Baguio, Cuyo’s petition for mandamus is barred by the implied abandonment of his office  and, also, by  laches.  As  a  consequence,  his claims  for backpay  and damages  must,  also,  fail.

Wherefore, the decision  appealed from must be, as it is hereby reversed, and the  petition dismissed, with costs against the petitioner.  It  is so ordered.

Bengzon, Padilla, Montemayor, Reyes, A., Bantista Angelo,  Labrador, Reyes, J. B. L., Endencia and Felix, JJ., concur.