G.R. No. L-4945 October 28, 1953
TEODULO T. ORAIS ET AL., petitioners-appellants, FELIPE ERNELO and LUIS MARTE, petitioners-appellees, vs. MAMERTO S. RIBO, ET AL., respondents-appellees, BIENVENIDO GONZALES and CONSTANCIO ACASIO, respondents-appellants.

FACTS

The petitioners, fifteen provincial guards of Leyte stationed at Maasin, were appointed on September 1, 1949, and assumed office on September 2, 1949. Their appointments were authorized by the Acting Commissioner of Civil Service under Section 682 of the Revised Administrative Code, “to continue only until replaced by an eligible, but not beyond thirty (30) days from the date of receipt of the certification of eligibles, provided, there is no qualified employee from the ranks who may be promoted to the position involved.” Four petitioners (Manuel Kangleon, Alfredo Lucin, Felipe Enelo, and Luis Marte) were veterans pursuant to Republic Act No. 65 , as amended by Republic Act No. 154 , but were not civil service eligibles. The rest were not veterans and had not qualified in any civil service examination. On October 31, 1950, the Provincial Governor, Mamerto S. Ribo, terminated their services and appointed new respondents to their positions. The petitioners refused to vacate their posts until January 8, 1951. They filed a petition for quo warranto to test the legality of the new appointments and for mandamus to compel their reinstatement, payment of unpaid salaries from November 1, 1950, and the turnover of prisoners.

ISSUE

The primary issue is whether the termination of the petitioners’ appointments and their replacement by the respondents were lawful, considering the nature of their appointments under Section 682 of the Revised Administrative Code and the veterans’ preference under Republic Act No. 65 , as amended.

RULING

The Supreme Court ruled that the appointments of the petitioners under Section 682 of the Revised Administrative Code were temporary, authorized only until replaced by an eligible and not to exceed three months, extendable only up to thirty days from receipt of a certification of eligibles. The fact that they held the positions for more than three months did not make them eligibles. The replacement of non-eligible petitioners (Orais, Lim, Saligo, and Bernades) by eligible respondents (Magallanes, Flores, Tavera, and Ravago) was lawful. The replacement of non-eligible petitioners by non-eligible respondents was also lawful under Section 682. However, the replacement of the veteran petitioners (Felipe Enelo and Luis Marte), who were non-eligibles, by non-eligible respondents (Bienvenido Gonzales and Constancio Acasio) was unlawful. Veterans appointed within the term provided under Republic Act No. 65 , as amended, have a preference right to continue holding their positions until an eligible is certified by the Commissioner of Civil Service. The petition concerning Manuel Kangleon and Alfredo Lucin was dismissed as there was no averment that their positions were usurped or that they were replaced. Republic Act No. 557 , which guarantees tenure for eligible provincial guards, does not protect non-eligibles like Gonzales and Acasio. The judgment appealed from was affirmed.