G.R. No. L-17803; June 30, 1962
EMILIO MENDENILLA, petitioner-appellant, vs. JOSE MANUEL ONANDIA, respondent-appellee.

FACTS

Petitioner Emilio Mendenilla was the duly appointed Chief of Police of the Municipality of Legaspi, Albay, since 1954. On June 12, 1959, Republic Act No. 2234, the charter converting Legaspi into a city, took effect. Section 22 of this charter vested in the President of the Philippines, with the consent of the Commission on Appointments, the power to appoint the City Chief of Police. Mendenilla continued to discharge the duties of the position. On February 26, 1960, the President designated Mendenilla as Acting Chief of Police of the City of Legaspi, retroactive to June 12, 1959. However, on March 15, 1960, the President nominated respondent Jose Manuel Onandia as the permanent Chief of Police. Mendenilla’s acting designation was terminated on March 18, 1960, and Onandia was immediately designated as the Acting Chief. Onandia’s nomination was later confirmed by the Commission on Appointments on May 11, 1960. Mendenilla filed a quo warranto petition claiming legal entitlement to the office.

ISSUE

The main issue is who between Mendenilla and Onandia is legally entitled to the office of Chief of Police of the City of Legaspi.

RULING

The Supreme Court ruled in favor of respondent Onandia. The legal logic is anchored on the doctrine that the legislative power to create or abolish municipal corporations is plenary. The conversion of the Municipality of Legaspi into a chartered city under R.A. No. 2234 effected a legal abolition of the former municipal government and its offices. Consequently, the office of Municipal Chief of Police held by Mendenilla was abolished. The office of City Chief of Police created by the new charter is a new and entirely different office. Mendenilla’s original appointment did not automatically transfer to the new city office; he needed a new appointment. The President’s subsequent designation of Mendenilla was merely in an acting capacity, which is temporary and terminable at will. Therefore, when the President terminated Mendenilla’s acting appointment and subsequently nominated and appointed Onandia (with confirmation), the appointment was valid. Mendenilla’s claim of preference as a veteran under R.A. No. 1363 is unavailing, as the President’s appointing power under the specific city charter is not restricted by such requirement for the heads of city departments. The Court affirmed the trial court’s decision declaring Onandia the lawful holder of the office.