GR L 27017; (August, 1967) (Digest)
G.R. No. L-27017 August 15, 1967
PACIFICO M. BRAGANZA, petitioner, vs. THE COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, THE COMMISSIONER OF CIVIL SERVICE and BENJAMIN ABELLA, respondents.
FACTS
On November 2, 1964, the Commission on Elections (COMELEC) extended provisional appointments as “Election Registrar in the Commission on Elections” to both petitioner Pacifico M. Braganza and respondent Benjamin Abella, without designating any specific official station. Both were subsequently directed via identical telegrams dated November 9, 1964, to report and assume duties as election registrars for Mabini, Pangasinan. They duly qualified and complied. On August 20, 1965, the petitioner was designated officer-in-charge of the election registrar’s office at Mabini, Pangasinan. However, on September 7, 1966, the COMELEC appointed Abella as permanent “Election Registrar for Mabini, Pangasinan.” This appointment was certified by the Civil Service Commission, and Abella qualified and commenced his duties on November 8, 1966. The petitioner’s motion for reconsideration with the COMELEC, seeking to have himself retained as the permanent election registrar, was denied, prompting the present petition for prohibition and mandamus.
ISSUE
Whether or not the petitioner has acquired a vested right to the office of permanent election registrar of Mabini, Pangasinan, with the concomitant security of tenure.
RULING
No. The Supreme Court denied the petition. The Court held that the petitioner’s provisional appointment, which did not indicate a specific official station, and his subsequent mere detail or assignment to Mabini, Pangasinan, did not vest in him a right to that particular office sufficient to invoke the constitutional guaranty of security of tenure. Only officers appointed—not merely assigned—to particular stations are entitled to such security. The power to appoint is discretionary, and the COMELEC’s determination of who should be appointed as permanent election registrar for Mabini must be respected. The petitioner’s reliance on COMELEC’s “Guidelines In The Assignment Of Election Registrars” was misplaced, as these guidelines were intended for assignments without new appointments, not to control the discretion in making permanent appointments. The petitioner, having accepted his provisional appointment and discharged its functions, cannot later impugn its validity to support his claim.