G.R. No. 173931 ; April 2, 2009
ALICIA D. TAGARO, Petitioner, vs. ESTER A. GARCIA, Chairperson of the Commission on Higher Education (CHED), represented by the present chair CARLITO G. PUNO, Respondent.

FACTS

Petitioner Alicia D. Tagaro was appointed Director II of the Higher Education Development Fund (HEDF) at CHED on December 16, 1996. Following a request from CHED, the Department of Budget and Management (DBM) approved the reclassification and upgrading of her position to Director III, effective not earlier than May 1, 1999, as reflected in a Notice of Organization, Staffing and Compensation Action (NOSCA). Petitioner received a Notice of Salary Adjustment (NOSA) reflecting her salary at the Director III level. However, CHED Chairman Ester A. Garcia, upon clarification from the Office of the President, determined that a new presidential appointment was required for the reclassified position. Petitioner was directed to submit required documents for the new appointment but failed to comply. Consequently, CHED rolled back her salary to Director II and demanded a refund of the salary differential. Petitioner filed a special civil action before the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Quezon City. While this was pending, CHED passed Resolution No. 008-2001, considering the Director II position abolished and designating an officer-in-charge, deeming petitioner no longer interested. Petitioner appealed this to the Civil Service Commission (CSC). Subsequently, CHED issued a Memorandum Order dated June 7, 2001, barring petitioner from entering CHED premises. Petitioner challenged this order before the RTC via an urgent motion and also filed an “Administrative Appeal” with the CSC (the second CSC Appeal). The RTC dismissed her petition for failure to exhaust administrative remedies. The Court of Appeals, in a prior case ( G.R. No. 158568 ), found petitioner guilty of forum shopping for simultaneously questioning the memorandum order before the RTC and the CSC. Later, the CSC, in Resolution Nos. 050801 and 051641, declared the June 7, 2001 Memorandum Order illegal and directed her reinstatement with back salaries. CHED appealed this to the Court of Appeals, which reversed the CSC resolutions. Petitioner filed the present Petition for Review.

ISSUE

Whether the Court of Appeals erred in reversing the Civil Service Commission resolutions which declared illegal the removal of petitioner from her office and directed her reinstatement with back salaries.

RULING

The Supreme Court dismissed the petition. The Court upheld the Court of Appeals’ finding that the CSC had no jurisdiction over petitioner’s second appeal because she was a presidential appointee, and the CSC’s jurisdiction is limited to administrative cases involving non-presidential appointees. Furthermore, the Court affirmed that petitioner was guilty of forum shopping, as previously established in G.R. No. 158568 (Tagaro v. Garcia), for seeking remedies on the same issue in two different fora simultaneously—the RTC and the CSC. The Court also noted that the issue had been rendered moot and academic by petitioner’s compulsory retirement on June 27, 2005.