G.R. No. L-6754 February 26, 1954
Mamerto Mission, et al., petitioners, vs. Vicente S. Del Rosario, as Acting Mayor of Cebu City, Felipe B. Pareja, as City Treasurer and Martin Kintanar, as City Auditor, respondents.

FACTS

Petitioners were detectives in the Police Department of Cebu City, duly appointed by the Mayor. Some were civil service eligibles. On May 11, 12, and 19, 1953, they were notified by the Mayor of their removal due to loss of confidence. Following their removal, the City Treasurer and City Auditor stopped their salary payments, their positions were declared vacant, and the Mayor immediately filled them with new appointees. Petitioners filed this petition for mandamus, arguing their removal violated the law and Constitution protecting civil service employees, and sought reinstatement with back salaries. Respondents justified the removal under Executive Order No. 264, contending the positions were primarily confidential and removable on grounds of lack of trust and confidence.

ISSUE

Whether the positions held by petitioners (detectives in the Cebu City Police Department) are to be considered part of the city police force, such that their removal is governed by the specific procedure and grounds in Republic Act No. 557 , rather than the summary procedure for confidential employees under Executive Order No. 264.

RULING

The petition is granted. Petitioners, as detectives, are members of the police force of Cebu City. An analysis of the City Charter ( Commonwealth Act No. 58 ) shows the detective force is part of the police department. Section 32 places the detective force under the charge of the Chief of Police. Section 34 places the Chief of the Secret Service and detective force under the Chief of Police. Section 35 classifies members of the city police detective force as peace officers. Thus, in law, both policemen and detectives belong to the police department and perform common functions. Authorities define “detective” as a police officer entrusted with detecting crimes and apprehending offenders. Since petitioners are members of the police force, their removal is governed by Republic Act No. 557 , which requires removal only for specific causes (misconduct, incompetency, dishonesty, etc.) and after a formal charge, investigation, and hearing by the city council. Their removal for loss of confidence under Executive Order No. 264, without the investigation mandated by Republic Act No. 557 , is illegal and without effect. Executive Order No. 264 is deemed impliedly repealed insofar as inconsistent with Republic Act No. 557 . The Court ordered reinstatement and payment of salaries from removal to reinstatement, without costs.