G.R. No. 154095 November 17, 2004
FRANCISCO C. ROSALES, JR., petitioner, vs. MIGUEL H. MIJARES, respondent.

FACTS

Petitioner Francisco Rosales, Jr., the newly elected Mayor of Catarman, Northern Samar, summoned Municipal Engineer Miguel Mijares and other department heads. During the conference, Rosales told Mijares to resign or face the abolition of his position. Mijares, not wishing to antagonize the mayor, later stated he was “open” to a transfer to the Provincial Engineering Office. Rosales instructed him to prepare his papers and subsequently issued a letter granting the transfer for a period of thirty days, subject to Civil Service rules. Mijares, however, continued reporting to his municipal office, and the provincial governor never acted on the endorsement.
After the thirty-day period lapsed, Rosales informed Mijares in writing that he was considered resigned pursuant to CSC Memorandum Circular No. 38, s. 1993, as his transfer was not effected. Mijares protested, arguing the transfer never materialized and thus he remained an employee of the municipality. Rosales maintained the separation was by operation of law but offered reinstatement. Mijares filed a complaint for illegal termination before the Civil Service Commission.

ISSUE

Whether or not respondent Mijares was illegally dismissed from his position as Municipal Engineer.

RULING

Yes, the Supreme Court affirmed the rulings of the Civil Service Commission and the Court of Appeals, finding the dismissal illegal. The legal logic centers on the constitutional guarantee of security of tenure and the absence of a valid transfer. The Court found that the purported transfer was not voluntary but a clever ploy by Mayor Rosales to oust Mijares, as evidenced by the initial coercive demand for resignation. A transfer in the civil service requires the employee’s consent, which was vitiated here by the mayor’s threat.
Furthermore, the Court held that CSC Memorandum Circular No. 38, which Rosales invoked, presupposes a valid and effective transfer. Since the provincial governor never accepted or acted upon the endorsement, Mijares never actually transferred from his original position. His continued reporting to the municipal office confirmed this. The separation, therefore, had no legal basis. The thirty-day period cited by Rosales pertained to a detail, not a transfer, and its expiration did not automatically result in resignation. The Court emphasized that technicalities cannot override the fundamental right to security of tenure. Mijares was ordered reinstated with full back wages and benefits.