View full case

CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION v. DR. AGNES OUIDA P. YU

FACTS:

The case involves a dispute over the nature of the Provincial Health Officer II (PHO II) position in Basilan. In 1992, the national government implemented a devolution program which affected various government agencies, including the Department of Health (DOH). Prior to the devolution, Dr. Fortunata Castillo held the position of PHO II, while Dr. Agnes Ouida P. Yu held the position of Provincial Health Officer I (PHO I) assigned in Basilan. After the devolution, Governor Gerry Salapuddin refused to accept Dr. Castillo as the incumbent PHO II, prompting DOH to retain her in Zamboanga City. In 1994, Governor Salapuddin appointed Dr. Yu as the PHO II.

In 1998, a law was passed re-nationalizing the Basilan Provincial Health Hospital and renaming it as the Basilan General Hospital. The position of PHO II was re-classified as Chief of Hospital II. When the hospital positions were reverted to the DOH, Dr. Yu was made to retain her original item of PHO II instead of being appointed as Chief of Hospital II. She filed a protest claiming her vested right to the position. The Civil Service Commission initially granted her protest but later reversed its decision after reconsideration. Dr. Yu filed a motion for reconsideration which was denied by the CSC. She then appealed to the Court of Appeals (CA).

The CA ruled in favor of Dr. Yu, declaring her to have a vested right in the position of Chief of Hospital II until her retirement. The CA held that she acquired a vested right to the position when she was appointed as PHO II in 1994, and that the subsequent reclassification of the position did not negate her right. The CA also held that the devolution of the PHO II position was not proven and that there was no showing that Dr. Yu's appointment was temporary or a stop-gap measure. The CSC then filed a Petition for Review on Certiorari with the Supreme Court.

ISSUES:

  1. Whether the PHO II position previously occupied by respondent is a devolved position.

  2. Whether Governor Salapuddin's refusal to accept Dr. Castillo's transfer was valid and legal.

  3. Whether Dr. Castillo's detail to the DOH Regional Office was justified.

  4. Whether Dr. Castillo abandoned her position.

  5. Whether or not Dr. Yu was validly appointed to the position of PHO II and acquired a vested right to its re-classified designation Chief of Hospital II.

  6. Whether or not Dr. Yu should have been automatically re-appointed by Secretary Dayrit in accordance with the Guidelines for the Re-Nationalization of Personnel, Assets, and Appropriations of Basilan Provincial Hospital.

  7. Whether or not Dr. Yu is entitled to receive her salaries and benefits as Chief of Hospital from December 2001 up to her retirement in August 24, 2004.

RULING:

  1. The Court ruled that the PHO II position previously occupied by the respondent is a devolved position. Pursuant to the Local Government Code of 1991, national agencies or offices, including the Department of Health (DOH), were mandated to devolve to local government units (LGUs) the responsibility for the provision of basic services and facilities. The devolution process includes the transfer of records, equipment, assets, and personnel of national agencies or offices to the LGUs. The LGUs are mandated to absorb the personnel, except when it is not administratively viable due to duplication of functions. In this case, Governor Salapuddin was required to absorb the PHO II position and its incumbent, as the absence of discretion is evident in the mandatory language used in the law and executive order. Despite the clear requirement, Governor Salapuddin refused to reappoint the respondent to her devolved position. There is evidence showing that the PHO II position was devolved to the Provincial Government of Basilan. Therefore, the argument of the petitioner that only 53 plantilla positions were devolved does not hold water. The PHO II position previously occupied by the respondent is indeed a devolved position.

  2. The refusal of Governor Salapuddin to accept Dr. Castillo's transfer was arbitrary and whimsical. There was no valid and legal basis for his refusal, and it was shown that the absorption of Dr. Castillo by the LGU was administratively viable. Therefore, the refusal was deemed invalid.

  3. Dr. Castillo's detail to the DOH Regional Office was proper and justified. It was confirmed by the Secretary of Health and was in accordance with the law on details of employees.

  4. Dr. Castillo did not abandon her position. Her seeming lackadaisical attitude towards protecting her rights cannot be construed as an abandonment because Governor Salapuddin's refusal to accept her transfer negated any voluntariness on her part to let go of her position.

  5. Yes, Dr. Yu was validly appointed to the position of PHO II and acquired a vested right to its re-classified designation Chief of Hospital II.

  6. Yes, Dr. Yu should have been automatically re-appointed by Secretary Dayrit in accordance with the Guidelines for the Re-Nationalization of Personnel, Assets, and Appropriations of Basilan Provincial Hospital.

  7. Yes, Dr. Yu is entitled to receive her salaries and benefits as Chief of Hospital from December 2001 up to her retirement in August 24, 2004.

PRINCIPLES:

  • Devolution is the act by which the national government confers power and authority upon local government units to perform specific functions and responsibilities.

  • The devolution process includes the transfer of records, equipment, assets, and personnel of national agencies or offices to local government units.

  • Absorption of personnel by the local government unit is mandatory, unless it is not administratively viable due to duplication of functions.

  • The use of the word "shall" in a statute denotes an imperative obligation and is inconsistent with the idea of discretion.

  • Devolved permanent personnel shall be automatically reappointed by the local chief executive concerned immediately upon their transfer, unless there is a recognized exception.

  • Refusal to accept a transfer must have a valid and legal basis; arbitrary and whimsical refusals are deemed invalid.

  • Details of employees to other offices are allowed for a limited period and must be justified.

  • Abandonment of office requires a complete abandonment of duties with the intention to relinquish control; lackadaisical attitude towards protecting one's rights does not constitute abandonment.

  • Public officers must comply with the law and perform their duties in accordance with the standards of responsibility, integrity, propriety, and efficiency.

  • Appointment to a position in the government involves a public trust and must be based solely on merit and fitness.

  • In the absence of any grave abuse of discretion on the part of the appointing authority, the appointment of public officers is deemed valid and effective.

  • Re-nationalized personnel who are transferred to another government agency should not be involuntarily separated, terminated, or laid off, and should continue to enjoy security of tenure.

  • Re-nationalized personnel should be automatically re-appointed by the Secretary immediately upon their transfer.

  • Re-nationalized personnel should retain their pay or benefits without diminution.

  • Retired individuals who were receiving salaries for a certain position may still be entitled to receive salaries and benefits for a re-classified position if they continued to render services in that capacity after retirement.