G.R. No. L-16782 and L-16783; May 30, 1963
Silvestre Cuñado, petitioner-appellant, vs. David Gamus, Mayor of Mabini, Doroteo Monisa, Municipal Treasurer of Mabini, and Pacifico Ruiz, Provincial Auditor, respondents-appellants. (Consolidated with Inocentes Vallecera and Cresenciano Asa, petitioners-appellants, vs. David Gamus, Mayor of Mabini, Doroteo Monisa, Municipal Treasurer of Mabini and Pacifico Ruiz, Provincial Auditor, respondents-appellants.)

FACTS

In G.R. No. L-16782, petitioner Silvestre Cuñado, permanently appointed Chief of Police of Mabini, Bohol, was suspended and subsequently dismissed on February 22, 1956, following administrative charges. He was acquitted in a related criminal case on March 15, 1956. The Commissioner of Civil Service later exonerated him and ordered his reinstatement, which was effected on April 17, 1957. The sole issue was his entitlement to back salaries covering his suspension period from January 19, 1956, to April 16, 1957. The lower court ordered the approval of his salary voucher but dismissed his claim for damages against the mayor, finding no proof of bad faith.
In G.R. No. L-16783, petitioners Inocentes Vallecera and Cresenciano Asa, veterans but not civil service eligibles, held temporary appointments as policemen under Section 682 of the Revised Administrative Code. They were similarly dismissed on February 22, 1956, after being found guilty of administrative charges by the municipal council, and were also acquitted in a criminal case on March 15, 1956. The Commissioner of Civil Service exonerated them on February 13, 1957, but they were not reinstated, having been replaced by other non-eligibles. The lower court ordered their reinstatement, provided their replacements had held the positions for more than three months, and awarded them back salaries, but also denied their claim for damages against the mayor for lack of proof of bad faith.

ISSUE

The primary legal issues are: (1) Whether Cuñado is entitled to back salaries during his suspension; (2) Whether Vallecera and Asa, as temporary appointees, are entitled to reinstatement and back salaries after exoneration; and (3) Whether the respondent mayor acted in bad faith, justifying an award of damages.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the lower court’s decision in G.R. No. L-16782 regarding Cuñado’s back salaries. A permanent employee exonerated of administrative charges is entitled to back salaries for the period of wrongful separation, as the exoneration establishes the suspension and dismissal were without cause. However, the Court upheld the denial of damages, as the absence of proof that Mayor Gamus acted in bad faith or with malice precluded such an award. Mere refusal to approve the voucher, without more, does not constitute actionable wrong warranting damages.
In G.R. No. L-16783, the Supreme Court reversed the lower court’s decision regarding Vallecera and Asa. As temporary appointees under Section 682 of the Revised Administrative Code, their appointments were subject to replacement at any time after three months by other non-eligibles. Their preferential right as veterans under Republic Act No. 65 had lapsed, as they failed to demonstrate compliance with its requisites, such as certification by the Philippine Veterans Board and qualification in an appropriate civil service examination. Consequently, they possessed no vested right to the positions or to back salaries upon exoneration. The Commissioner of Civil Service’s decision explicitly noted they could be replaced. The denial of their claim for damages was also sustained for lack of evidence of bad faith