CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION, PETITIONER, VS. PACOL DISUMIMBA RASUMAN, RESPONDENT.

Civil Service Commission versus Rasuman

The Case

This is a petition for review on certiorari brought by the Civil Service Commission against Pacol Disumimba Rasuman, a Senior Executive Assistant in the Bureau of Customs. The Commission asks the Supreme Court to annul the decision and resolution of the Court of Appeals which had compelled it to give effect to a regional trial court judgment correcting Rasuman's date of birth in the civil registry. The case matters because it fixes the rule on who must be impleaded in a petition for correction of entries in the civil registry, and it settles the tension between the idea that such a proceeding binds the whole world and the constitutional demand that no person be affected by a judgment without notice and an opportunity to be heard.

Procedural History

Rasuman filed a verified petition for correction of his date of birth before the Regional Trial Court of Lanao del Sur, Branch 9, in Marawi City, impleading the Local Civil Registrar of Marantao, Lanao del Sur. He later amended the petition to implead the Bureau of Customs. The trial court granted the petition and directed the local civil registrar to annotate the correction and the Bureau of Customs to correct its records. That decision became final and executory.

Rasuman then asked the Civil Service Commission, National Capital Region, to correct his date of birth in his service records. The regional office denied the request, and the Commission Proper dismissed his petition for review, holding that it was not bound by the trial court decision because it had not been impleaded. His motion for reconsideration was denied. Rasuman elevated the matter to the Court of Appeals, which granted his petition, reversed the Commission, and directed it to comply with the trial court decision. The Commission's motion for reconsideration was denied, so it came to the Supreme Court by petition for review on certiorari.

Facts

On April 16, 2014, Rasuman, a Senior Executive Assistant in the Bureau of Customs, filed a verified petition before the Regional Trial Court of Lanao del Sur, Branch 9, in Marawi City, seeking correction of his date of birth from February 12, 1952 to February 12, 1956. He impleaded the Local Civil Registrar of Marantao, Lanao del Sur. The court ordered publication of the notice in a newspaper of general circulation in Marawi City and Iligan City for three consecutive weeks, and directed that the order and petition be furnished the local civil registrar, the Office of the Solicitor General, and the Civil Registrar General. Rasuman complied. He later amended his petition to implead the Bureau of Customs.

On July 23, 2015, the trial court granted the petition, declared his true date of birth to be February 12, 1956, directed the local civil registrar to annotate the decision on his certificate of live birth, and directed the Bureau of Customs to effect the correction in its official records. The decision became final and executory on October 8, 2015.

On January 21, 2016, Rasuman asked the Civil Service Commission, National Capital Region, to correct his date of birth in his service records. He submitted his corrected certificate of live birth, affidavits, and certified copies of his service records showing the old date. On June 27, 2016, the regional office denied the request, noting that his school and employment records showed he attended elementary school from 1957 to 1962, which would make him only one year old in 1957 if born in 1956. The Commission Proper dismissed his petition for review on January 13, 2017, holding that it was not bound by the trial court decision because it had not been impleaded, although it was an indispensable party. Reconsideration was denied. The Court of Appeals reversed, ruling that the correction proceeding was an action in rem, binding on the whole world and validated by publication. Hence this petition.

Issues

• Whether or not the Civil Service Commission is an indispensable party in a petition for correction of entries in the civil registry that would affect a government employee's service records.
• Whether or not the failure to implead the Civil Service Commission was cured by publication of the notice of hearing, such that the trial court decision binds the Commission.
• Whether or not the Commission correctly denied the request for correction of the date of birth in the service records on the basis of the trial court decision.

Applicable Provisions

Section 3 of Rule 108 of the Rules of Court provides:

Section 3. Parties. When cancellation or correction of an entry in the civil register is sought, the civil registrar and all persons who have or claim any interest which would be affected thereby shall be made parties to the proceeding.

This provision makes the impleading of every interested party, including the Commission, mandatory rather than discretionary.

Section 4 of Rule 108 provides:

Section 4. Notice and Publication. Upon the filing of the petition, the court shall, by an order, fix the time and place for the hearing of the same, and cause reasonable notice thereof to be given to the persons named in the petition. The court shall also cause the order to be published once a week for three consecutive weeks in a newspaper of general circulation in the province.

This provision supplies the two sets of notice, one personal to persons named in the petition and one by publication to all others, which the Court uses to test whether due process was satisfied.

Section 5 of Rule 108 provides:

Section 5. Opposition. The civil registrar and any person having or claiming any interest under the entry whose cancellation or correction is sought may, within fifteen days from notice of the petition, or from the last date of publication of such notice, file his opposition thereto.

This provision confirms that an interested party must be given the chance to oppose, which presupposes that the party was made part of the proceeding.

Ruling

On the first issue, the Court held that the Civil Service Commission is an indispensable party. Under Executive Order No. 292, the Commission keeps and maintains the personnel records of all officials and employees in the civil service. A correction of the date of birth entails a substantial change in that public record, since Rasuman would gain four more years before reaching the compulsory retirement age. Section 3 of Rule 108 mandatorily requires that all persons who have or claim any interest which would be affected shall be made parties. The Court relied on its earlier ruling in Macawadib versus the Philippine National Police Directorate for Personnel and Records Management, where it held that the police, the National Police Commission, and the Civil Service Commission are indispensable parties in correction petitions affecting service records, and that a decision valid on its face cannot attain real finality where indispensable parties are wanting.

On the second issue, the Court rejected the Court of Appeals' reliance on the in rem character of the proceeding. It quoted its ruling in De Pedro versus Romasan Development Corporation:

However, to satisfy the requirements of due process, jurisdiction over the parties in in rem and quasi in rem actions is required.

The Court explained that the phrase against the thing is a metaphor, that only legal or natural persons may be parties even in in rem actions, and that due process requires that those with interest in the thing in litigation be notified and given an opportunity to defend those interests. Summons is served not to vest jurisdiction but to comply with fair play and due process. The Court distinguished Civil Service Commission versus Magoyag, where the Commission had been specifically directed by the trial court to effect the correction and thus had knowledge of the decision and could have opposed it. Here, the Commission was never impleaded and never ordered to make the correction, since the amended petition prayed only that the Bureau of Customs act. The Court also held that none of the recognized exceptions excusing failure to implead, such as earnest efforts to bring in all interested parties or inadvertence, applied, because Rasuman knew the correction would affect his employment yet did not exert earnest efforts to bring in the Commission.

On the third issue, the Court held that the Commission correctly denied the request, since it was not bound by a judgment rendered without it having been made a party and afforded due process.

Doctrine

In every petition for cancellation or correction of an entry in the civil registry, the civil registrar and all persons who have or claim any interest which would be affected thereby shall be made parties to the proceeding, as Section 3 of Rule 108 commands. The Civil Service Commission is an indispensable party in such a petition when the correction would affect a government employee's service records, because it keeps and maintains those records and the correction alters the employee's compulsory retirement date. Even in an action in rem, which is binding upon the whole world, jurisdiction over the parties is required to satisfy due process; publication alone does not cure the failure to implead an indispensable party who was known and could have been joined. A judgment rendered without an indispensable party has no effectiveness as to that party.

Disposition

The Supreme Court granted the petition, reversed and set aside the decision and resolution of the Court of Appeals, and reinstated the decision and resolution of the Civil Service Commission denying the correction, so that the Commission's records continue to reflect February 12, 1952 as Rasuman's date of birth.

Remember This

Memorize this line: in a correction of entries proceeding, publication does not excuse the failure to implead a known indispensable party, because due process requires personal notice to those whose interests are affected. Examiners use this case to test the interplay of Rule 108, indispensable parties, and the in rem doctrine, often pairing it with Magoyag to ask when the failure to implead is cured and when it is not.