### Facts:
Winston T. Singun, the Chief Trade and Industry Development Specialist of the Department of Trade and Industry, Regional Office No. 2 (DTI-RO2) in Cagayan Province, expressed his intention to retire and applied for an 8½ month leave starting 16 November 1999 with retirement effective 1 August 2000. This request was denied by Regional Director Jose Hipolito. Singun filed another application, this time for a shorter leave and immediate resignation effective 14 January 2000, which Hipolito endorsed but did not formally accept before receiving a detail order from Undersecretary Ernesto M. Ordoñez on 14 January 2000 to detail Singun to the Office of the Undersecretary for Regional Operations starting 17 January. Despite this detail order, Singun attempted to withdraw his resignation but was informed he had effectively resigned as of 14 January 2000 and could not withdraw. Singun contested this, claiming he had not been notified of any acceptance of his resignation and argued his resignation was under duress.
Following several appeals and administrative reviews, the Civil Service Commission (CSC) ruled Singun’s resignation inoperative due to lack of informed acceptance and ordered the payment of his salaries and benefits from 1 January 2000. The Court of Appeals affirmed this decision.
### Issues:
1. Whether Singun’s resignation from the DTI-RO2, effective 14 January 2000, was valid.
2. Whether the detail order issued by Undersecretary Ordoñez effectively withdrew Singun’s resignation.
### Court’s Decision:
The Supreme Court denied the petition, affirming the decision of the Court of Appeals. It ruled that for a resignation to be operative and effective, there must be a notice of acceptance to the incumbent. In Singun’s case, there was no evidence that he was duly informed of the acceptance of his resignation. The Court also held that until the resignation is accepted, it is revocable, and Singun validly withdrew his resignation before any acceptance was communicated.
### Doctrine:
For a resignation to be effective, there must be: a) an intention to relinquish a part of the term, b) an act of relinquishment, and crucially c) an acceptance by the proper authority, signified by notifying the incumbent of this acceptance.
### Class Notes:
– **Key Elements of Resignation**: Intention to relinquish, act of relinquishment, and acceptance by proper authority.
– **Operative Resignation Requirement**: Notification of acceptance is crucial for a resignation to be considered operative and effective.
– **Revocability of Unaccepted Resignation**: A resignation can be withdrawn before it is accepted by the authority.
– **Relevant Statutes**:
– **Article 238 of the Revised Penal Code**: Relates to abandonment of office or position before the acceptance of resignation.
### Historical Background:
The case highlights the administrative challenges and procedural requirements for resignation within the Philippine government sector. It underscores the imperative of clear communication and formal procedures in the resignation process, ensuring that resignations are both voluntary and unequivocally accepted by appropriate authorities to be binding. This decision reinforces the safeguard against involuntary or coerced resignations and establishes the importance of procedural fairness in administrative processes.
Leave a Reply