G.R. No. L-20093 March 31, 1965
CAPT. J. ANTONIO M. CARPIO, ET AL., petitioners-appellants, vs. HON. MACARIO PERALTA, JR., ET AL., respondents-appellees.

FACTS

Petitioners, reserve officers with five or more years of active service, were selected for retention by a Board of Officers created by the Chief of Staff pursuant to Republic Act No. 2334. The Board’s selection, based on criteria including indispensable technical skills and lack of satisfactory replacements, was stated in its Standing Operating Procedure to be “final and unappealable.” Despite this selection, the Chief of Staff issued warning orders and a flash radiogram reverting petitioners and other reserve officers to inactive status. Petitioners sought to enjoin the Secretary of National Defense and the Chief of Staff from implementing these reversion orders, arguing the Board’s selection was final and binding. The Court of First Instance of Rizal dismissed the petition and cancelled a preliminary injunction, prompting this appeal.

ISSUE

What is the effect of the selection for retention in the active service made by the Board of Officers constituted pursuant to Republic Act No. 2334? Is such selection final, conclusive, and binding upon the President, the Secretary of National Defense, and the Chief of Staff?

RULING

The selection made by the Board of Officers is merely recommendatory and not final or conclusive upon the superior officers. The proviso in Section 3 of Republic Act No. 2334, stating “the selection of every officer shall be as determined by a Board of Officers,” does not imply finality. The Board’s function is a process of elimination to guide superior officers. The Department Head (Secretary of National Defense) has direct control and supervision under Section 79(c) of the Revised Administrative Code and may modify decisions when advisable in the public interest. Furthermore, under Section 74 of the same Code, the Department Head is under the President’s supervision and control in matters of general policy, such as military organization. Section 22(m) of Commonwealth Act No. 1 (National Defense Act) empowers the President to order reserve officers to active duty at any time and for any period, implying discretion to revert them. Republic Act No. 2334 did not repeal this presidential authority; it merely made the mandatory reversion under Section 2 inapplicable to selected officers. The legislative intent, as shown in the explanatory note and a congressional speech, was to compel rotation of reserve officers, not to withdraw the President’s pre-existing reversion authority. The Board’s “final and unappealable” rule in its Standing Operating Procedure cannot override the superior legal authority of the President, the Secretary, and the Chief of Staff. The appealed order is affirmed, with the modification that petitioners are entitled to payment of their accrued vacation and sick leaves, as well as the gratuity provided under Section 4 of Republic Act No. 2334 upon their reversion.