G.R. No. L-29827, March 31, 1973
ANTONIO J. VILLEGAS, in his capacity as City Mayor of Manila, petitioner, vs. JUAN PONCE ENRILE, JOSE L. GAMBOA, ABELARDO SUBIDO, HUGODINO COSIN LIM, and HERMOGENES DIEGO, in their respective capacities as Secretary of Justice, Acting City Fiscal of Manila, Commissioner of Civil Service, City Auditor of Manila and Acting City Treasurer of Manila, and PATROCINIA C. GASPAR, BRIGIDA B. VERGARA, CONRADO AZARRAGA, EMILIA QUERI, MANUEL L. ASIS and GLORIA ALCAIDE, respondents.

FACTS

Petitioner Antonio J. Villegas, the Mayor of Manila, sought to assert a power of appointment over subordinate personnel in the Office of the City Fiscal, contending that Section 4 of the Decentralization Act (Republic Act No. 5185) granted him broader authority. This section empowered city mayors to appoint heads of offices entirely paid from city funds and their assistants. Mayor Villegas, by letter dated January 10, 1968, requested the City Fiscal to furnish him the plantilla and service records of appointive employees in that office to facilitate such appointments. Respondent City Fiscal Jose L. Gamboa denied the request, relying on an opinion from the Secretary of Justice which maintained that the power of appointment remained with the Secretary. Subsequently, the Secretary of Justice proceeded to appoint several individuals to positions in the City Fiscal’s Office after January 1, 1968, and these appointments were approved by the Civil Service Commissioner and their salaries processed by the city’s financial officers.

ISSUE

Whether the Decentralization Act transferred the power to appoint subordinate personnel in the Office of the City Fiscal of Manila from the Secretary of Justice to the City Mayor.

RULING

The Supreme Court dismissed the petition, ruling that the power of appointment remains vested in the Secretary of Justice. The legal logic is clear from the express language and intent of the governing statutes. First, the Court cited its precedent in Sangalang v. Vergara, which held that under the Charter of the City of Manila (Republic Act No. 409), the appointment of clerks in the City Fiscal’s Office falls under the Department Head’s power as per the Revised Administrative Code. Second, and decisively, the Court applied its recent ruling in Villegas v. Subido, which directly addressed the interpretation of Section 4 of the Decentralization Act. This provision explicitly lists offices whose heads and assistants are to be appointed by the City Mayor but contains a proviso: “That this section shall not apply to Judges, Auditors, Fiscal, City Superintendents of Schools, Supervisors, Principals, City Health Officers and City Engineers.” By expressly exempting the City Fiscal from its coverage, the law unequivocally excluded the entire Office of the City Fiscal from the mayor’s appointing power under the Decentralization Act. This interpretation preserves the Secretary of Justice’s supervision and control over fiscals, which is essential for a unified national legal policy and the effective administration of justice. The Court emphasized that allowing the mayor to appoint the fiscal’s subordinates would disrupt the executive department’s unifunctional administrative machinery and undermine the Secretary’s constitutional power of control. Therefore, the status quo under the City Charter and prior jurisprudence remained undisturbed.