G.R. No. 237742 . October 08, 2018
CELSO OLIVIER T. DATOR, PETITIONER, V. HON. CONCHITA CARPIO-MORALES, IN HER CAPACITY AS THE OMBUDSMAN, AND HON. GERARD A. MOSQUERA, IN HIS CAPACITY AS THE DEPUTY OMBUDSMAN FOR LUZON, AND THE DEPARTMENT OF INTERIOR AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT, RESPONDENTS.

FACTS

The case originated from an administrative complaint filed against petitioner Celso Olivier T. Dator, the incumbent Mayor of Lucban, Quezon, for grave misconduct, grave abuse of authority, and nepotism. The complaint alleged that during his immediately preceding term, Dator hired his sister, Maria Lyncelle D. Macandile, as Municipal Administrator through a Job Order and a Special Order, without submitting any appointment paper to the Sangguniang Bayan for confirmation as required by the Local Government Code. It was further alleged that Macandile lacked the statutory qualifications for the position and that the Job Order contained a false attestation that she was not related within the prohibited degree to the hiring authority.
In their defense, Dator and Macandile argued that the designation was made in the exigency of public service, that the position was primarily confidential and coterminous, and that it did not exist in the municipal plantilla, thus not requiring a formal appointment. They also contended that the practice of using Job Orders for such designations was prevalent, even during the complainant’s own prior administration.

ISSUE

The core issue is whether the Ombudsman committed grave abuse of discretion in finding petitioner Dator administratively liable for Simple Misconduct for designating his sister as Municipal Administrator via a Job Order and Special Order.

RULING

The Supreme Court denied the petition and affirmed the findings of the Ombudsman. The Court held that the Ombudsman did not commit grave abuse of discretion, as its decision was supported by substantial evidence and a correct application of the law. The legal logic is clear: the position of Municipal Administrator is governed by specific statutory qualifications under Section 480 of the Local Government Code, including citizenship, residency, good moral character, a relevant college degree, civil service eligibility, and requisite management experience. The Court emphasized that this position is not considered part of the personal or confidential staff of a local chief executive, which would otherwise exempt it from such stringent requirements under Civil Service rules.
By designating his sister through a mere Job Order—a contractual arrangement intended for temporary, non-career service—instead of following the proper appointment process, Dator circumvented the legal requirements designed to ensure merit and fitness in public service. His act of signing a document containing a false attestation regarding the prohibited relationship constituted a transgression of established norms and standards for public officials. This conduct, characterized by a deviation from a prescribed rule of action, properly constitutes Simple Misconduct. The penalty imposed by the Ombudsman was within its statutory authority. The Court reiterated its policy of non-interference in the Ombudsman’s exercise of its investigatory and disciplinary powers, absent a clear showing of grave abuse of discretion, which was not present in this case.