This case discusses a dispute between the Career Executive Service Board (CESB) and the Civil Service Commission (CSC) over the CSC's authority to review decisions of the CESB. The CESB denied the Public Attorney's Office's request to declassify certain positions, claiming they required Career Executive Service eligibility. The CSC granted the PAO's appeal and reversed the CESB's resolution. The CESB then challenged the CSC's jurisdiction. The Supreme Court ruled that the CSC has broad authority as the central personnel agency of the government to review civil service matters and personnel actions of attached agencies like the CESB. As an independent constitutional body, the CSC can exercise powers inherent and incident
This case discusses a dispute between the Career Executive Service Board (CESB) and the Civil Service Commission (CSC) over the CSC's authority to review decisions of the CESB. The CESB denied the Public Attorney's Office's request to declassify certain positions, claiming they required Career Executive Service eligibility. The CSC granted the PAO's appeal and reversed the CESB's resolution. The CESB then challenged the CSC's jurisdiction. The Supreme Court ruled that the CSC has broad authority as the central personnel agency of the government to review civil service matters and personnel actions of attached agencies like the CESB. As an independent constitutional body, the CSC can exercise powers inherent and incident
This case discusses a dispute between the Career Executive Service Board (CESB) and the Civil Service Commission (CSC) over the CSC's authority to review decisions of the CESB. The CESB denied the Public Attorney's Office's request to declassify certain positions, claiming they required Career Executive Service eligibility. The CSC granted the PAO's appeal and reversed the CESB's resolution. The CESB then challenged the CSC's jurisdiction. The Supreme Court ruled that the CSC has broad authority as the central personnel agency of the government to review civil service matters and personnel actions of attached agencies like the CESB. As an independent constitutional body, the CSC can exercise powers inherent and incident
This case discusses a dispute between the Career Executive Service Board (CESB) and the Civil Service Commission (CSC) over the CSC's authority to review decisions of the CESB. The CESB denied the Public Attorney's Office's request to declassify certain positions, claiming they required Career Executive Service eligibility. The CSC granted the PAO's appeal and reversed the CESB's resolution. The CESB then challenged the CSC's jurisdiction. The Supreme Court ruled that the CSC has broad authority as the central personnel agency of the government to review civil service matters and personnel actions of attached agencies like the CESB. As an independent constitutional body, the CSC can exercise powers inherent and incident
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
Download as docx, pdf, or txt
You are on page 1/ 3
Administrative Law Case Digest Pasquin, Irish Mae
Career Executive Service Board vs. CSC, Gr No. 197762
FACTS: PAO received a copy of the CESB Report on the CES occupancy of the DOJ stating, among others, that out of the 35 filled positions in the PAO, 33 were occupied by persons without the required CES eligibility. In response, PAO Deputy Chief Attorney Mosing sent a letter to CESD Executive Director informing her that the positions of Chief Public Attorney, Deputy Chief Public Attorney, and Regional Public Attorneys (subject positions) were already permanent in nature pursuant to Sec. 6 of RA 9406 which accorded security of tenure to the occupants thereof. Subsequently, Mosing received a letter from CESB informing him that the latter will conduct a classification study on the specified positions to determine whether they may still be considered CES positions in the DOJ. While the matter was pending, Mosing sought the opinion of the DOJ Secretary which opined that the positions were temporary considering that the occupants of the subject positions do not possess the required CES eligibility. However, in an opinion send by the CSC to Mosing, the former opined that the subject positions do not require CES eligibility as it was not specifically stated in the law (RA 9406) since what is required is the practice of law and admission to the bar. To require additional qualifications would be expanding the law illegally. Nonetheless, the CESB issued a resolution denying PAO’s request to declassify the subject positions citing that the same require leadership and managerial competence and were thus part of the CES. Hence, the appointment of persons without third-level eligibility for these posts cannot be considered permanent. The PAO assailed the CESB resolution before the CSC claiming that it was against RA 9406 in relation to RA 10071 and that the CESB usurped the legislative functions of the Congress when the former required additional qualification for the appointment to certain PAO positions. PAO also asserted that its appeal was brought to the CSC because the latter has the power to review decisions and actions of one of its attached agencies. For its part, CESB filed a motion for clarification assailing the authority of the CSC to review its decisions. It asserted that CSC had no jurisdiction to decide the appeal given that the appeal involves a controversy between 2 government entities regarding questions of law and that the CESB was an autonomous agency whose actions were appealable to the Office of the President. The CSC granted the appeal of PAO and reversed the resolution of the CESB. Hence, this petition. ISSUE/S: WON the CSC has authority to review decisions of the CESB. HELD: Yes.
Article IX-B of the 1987 Constitution entrusts to the CSC the administration of the civil service, which is comprised of "all branches, subdivisions, instrumentalities, and agencies of the Government, including government-owned or controlled corporations with original charters." In particular, Section 3 of Article IX-B provides for the mandate of this independent constitutional commission:
SECTION 3. The Civil Service Commission, as the central personnel agency of the Government, shall establish a career service and adopt measures to promote morale, Administrative Law Case Digest Pasquin, Irish Mae
efficiency, integrity, responsiveness, progressiveness, and courtesy in the civil service. It
shall strengthen the merit and rewards system, integrate all human resources development programs for all levels and ranks, and institutionalize a management climate conducive to public accountability. It shall submit to the President and the Congress an annual report on its personnel programs.
The proceedings of the 1986 Constitutional Commission reveal the intention to emphasize the status of the CSC as the "central personnel agency of the Government with all powers and functions inherent in and incidental to human resources management." As a matter of fact, the original proposed provision on the functions of the CSC reads:
Sec. 3. The Civil Service Commission, as the central personnel agency of the government. shall establish a career service, promulgate and enforce policies on personnel actions, classify positions, prescribe conditions of employment except as to compensation and other monetary benefits which shall be provided by law, and exercise alt powers and functions inherent in and incidental to human resources management, to promote morale, efficiency, and integrity in the Civil Service. It shall submit to the President and the Congress an annual report on its personnel programs, and perform such other functions as may be provided by law.
Although the specific powers of the CSC are not enumerated in the final version of 1987 Constitution, it is evident from the deliberations of the framers that the concept of a "central personnel agency" was considered all-encompassing. The concept was understood to be sufficiently broad as to include the authority to promulgate and enforce policies on personnel actions, to classify positions, and to exercise all powers and functions inherent in and incidental to human resources management
It is evident from constitutional and statutory provisions that the CSC, as the central personnel agency of the government, has been granted the broad authority and the specific powers to pass upon all civil service matters.
On the other hand, the CES was created to "form a continuing pool of well-selected and development-oriented career administrators who shall provide competent and faithful service." The CESB was likewise established to serve as the governing body of the CES with the following functions: (a) to promulgate rules, standards and procedures for the selection, classification, compensation and career development of members of the CES; (b) to set up the organization and operation of the civil service in accordance with the guidelines provided in the plan; (c) to prepare a program of training and career development for members of the CES; (d) to investigate and adjudicate administrative complaints against members of the CES.
When the Administrative Code was enacted in 1987, the CESB was given the additional authority to (a) identify other officers belonging to the CES in keeping with the conditions imposed by law; and (b) prescribe requirements for entrance to the third-level.
Based on the foregoing provisions, it is clear that the powers granted to the CESB are specific and limited. Administrative Law Case Digest Pasquin, Irish Mae
In The Matter of Save The Supreme Court Judicial Independence and Fiscal Autonomy Movement vs. Abolition of Judiciary Development Fund (JDF) and Reduction of Fiscal Autonomy
