BIBIANO MADERAZO, JR., PETITIONER-APPELLEE, VS. RAFAEL BAYLON, IN HIS CAPACITY AS DISTRICT SUPERVISOR, MAURO SABOLBORO, IN HIS CAPACITY AS DIVISION SUPERINTENDENT OF SCHOOLS, DI…

The question presented in this quo warranto action is whether or not a
public school district supervisor can be transferred from one district
to another regardless of his consent. The defunct Court of First
Instance of Manila gave a negative answer. The appellants assert that
the answer should be in the affirmative.

The facts are simple enough:

On August 5, 1965, Bibiano G. Maderazo, the petitioner-appellee, was
appointed Public Schools District Supervisor Range 41. The appointment
did not state the district where he was to discharge his duties but the
stipulation of facts shows that he was originally assigned to the
Caibiran District in Leyte.

In a letter dated July 9, 1966, Mauro Sabolboro, Leyte Division II
Superintendent of Schools, informed Maderazo of “your transfer from
Caibiran District to Biliran District as District Supervisor effective
immediately.”

Maderazo requested reconsideration of the order of transfer in no less
than four letters sent to the Director of Public Schools but the order
was not reconsidered. In fact on March 7, 1967, Superintendent
Sabolboro informed Maderazo that the Director of Public Schools had
ordered the implementation of his transfer.

Maderazo had not been charged administratively prior to the transfer.

In Maderazo’s letter dated March 10, 1967, addressed to the Secretary of
Education wherein he asked for reconsideration of the order of the
Director of Public Schools that the transfer be implemented, he stated, inter alia, “That I am now 61 years old and will retire in two years.”

It is obvious that in this year of 1984, Maderazo’s prayer that he be
restored to his office in Caibiran has become moot and academic for the
man is now well way beyond retirement age. Maderazo wrote a letter
dated February 23, 1984, asking for the early decision of his case. In
his letter he states, “I am now in my advanced age 79 years old, ailing
and desirous that I will still be able to vindicate myself and enjoy the
benefits or fruits of my labor.”

What remains to be resolved is Maderazo’s salary which was with­held
because he refused the transfer on the ground that it was illegal for
lack of consent on his part.

In deciding for Maderazo, the court a quo applied Republic Act No. 4670
known as the Magna Carta of Public School Teachers. The pro­visions of
the law which are relevant to this case are the following:

“Section 1. Declaration of Policy. – It is hereby
declared to be the policy of this Act to promote and improve the social
and economic status of public school teachers, their living and working
conditions, their terms of employment and career prospects in order that
they may compare favorably with existing opportunities in other walks
of life, attract and retain in the teaching profession more people with
the proper qualifications, it being recognized that advance in education
depends on the qualifications and ability of the teaching staff and
that education is an essential factor in the economic growth of the
nation as a productive investment of vital importance.

“Sec. 2. Title-Definition. – This Act shall be known as
the ‘Magna Carta for Public School Teachers’ and shall apply to all
public school teachers except those in the pro­fessional staff of state
colleges and universities.

As used in this Act, the term ‘teacher’ shall mean all persons engaged
in classroom teaching, in any level of instruction, on full-time basis,
including guidance counselors, school librarians, industrial arts or
vocational instructors, and all other persons performing supervisory
and/or administrative functions in all schools, colleges and
universities ope­rated by the Government or its political subdivision;
but shall not include school nurses, school physicians, school dentists,
and other school employees.

“Sec. 6. Consent for Transfer-Transportation Expenses. –
Except for cause and as herein otherwise provided, no teacher shall be
transferred without his consent from one station to another.

Where the exigencies of the service require the transfer of a teacher
from one station to another, such transfer may be effected by the school
superintendent who shall previously notify the teacher concerned of the
transfer and the reason or reasons therefor. If the teacher believes
there is no justification for the transfer, he may appeal his case to
the Director of Public Schools, or the Director of Vocational Education,
as the case may be. Pending his appeal and the decision thereon, his
transfer shall be held in abeyance: Provided, however, That no
transfers whatever shall be made three months before any local or
national election.

Necessary transfer expenses of the teacher and his family shall be paid
for by the Government if his transfer is finally approved.”

It is manifest that the transfer of Maderazo from Caibiran to Biliran
was contrary to the law because it was made without his consent and over
his opposition.

The respondents contend, however, that R.A. No. 4670 was not yet in force when the transfer was made. This is baseless.

R.A. No. 4670, according to its Section 35 took effect upon its
approval. It was approved on June 18, 1966, or before Maderazo was
ordered transferred from Caibiran to Biliran.

The Act stipulates that “The Secretary of Education shall formulate and
prepare the necessary rules and regulations to implement the provisions
of this Act. Rules and regulations issued pursuant to this Section
shall take effect thirty days after publication in a newspaper of
general circulation and by such other means as the Secretary of
Education deems reasonably sufficient to give interested parties general
notice of such issuance.” (Sec. 30.) And the respondents claim that
since the rules and regulations had not yet been published when Maderazo
was transferred, the Act was not yet in force. Wrong. The Magna Carta
covers a host of subjects which need elaboration by means of rules and
regulations. But there is nothing in Section 30 that would warrant a
conclusion that the promulgation of the rules and regulations is a
condition precedent to the effectivity of the Act. Section 6 of the Act
requiring consent for transfer is enforceable without recourse to the
rules and regulations.

WHEREFORE, the appeal is dismissed and judgment is hereby rendered
ordering the respondents or their successors to pay the sala­ries of the
petitioner from the time of his illegal transfer to the time he had to
retire compulsorily. No costs.

SO ORDERED.

Makasiar, (Chairman), Aquino, Concepcion, Jr., Guerrero, De Castro and Escolin, JJ., concur.