G.R. No. L-6137. January 22, 1954
GAUDENCIO MANIGRAS, PETITIONER AND APPELLANT, VS. ESTEBAN DE GUZMAN AND RAFAEL MACATANGAS, RESPONDENTS, APPELLEES.
REYES, J.:
1951, by the mayor of that municipality, but replaced by another more
than three months there-after, the petitioner Gaudencio Manigbas
brought quo warranto proceedings in the Court of First
Instance of the province to contest the legality of his removal from
office and the appointment of the respondent Esteban de Guzman in his
place, and upon receiving an adverse decision took an appeal to this
Court, contending that the lower court erred in holding that a
municipal mayor had discretionary power summarily to remove without
cause a chief of police holding a temporary appointment as a civil
service non-eligible and replace him with another non-eligible under an
appointment likewise temporary.
It appears that petitioner and respondent were civil service
non-eligibles and their appointments were authorized by the Commission
on Civil Service as “temporary” under section 682 of the Revised
Administrative Code, which provides that when a position in the
classified service—and the post of municipal chief of police is of that
nature—is temporarily filled by the appointment of one who is not a
qualified civil service eligible, such appointment “shall continue only
for such period not exceeding three months as may be necessary to make
appointment through certification of eligibles, and in no case shall
extend beyond thirty days from receipt by the chief of the bureau of
office of the Commissioner’s certificate of eligibles.” Interpreting
this provision in the case of Orais et al. vs. Ribo et al., G. R. No.
L-4945, decided on October 28, 1953, we held that “the holding of a
position by a temporary appointee until replaced by an eligible in
disregard of the time limitation of three months is unauthorized and
illegal,” and that “the replacement of non-eligibles by non-eligibles
is lawful under and pursuant to section 682 of the Revised
Administrative Code.” Conformably to those pronouncements, we ruled in
the case of Pena et al. vs. City Mayor et al.[*]
G. R. No. L-5700, decided December 18, 1953, that, as the positions of
members of the police department of a city are embraced within the
classified service, non-eligibles appointed to those positions can not
continue in office for more than three-months and can, therefore, be
thereafter replaced by other non-eligibles.
The present case being on all fours with the one last cited, the
decision appealed from must be, as it is hereby, affirmed, with costs
against the appellant.
Paras, C. J., Pablo, Bengzon, Padilla, Montemayor, Jugo, Bautista Angelo, and Labrador, JJ., concur.
[*] Supra, p. 103.