All appointments in favor of a relative of the appointing or recommending authority, or of the chief of the bureau or office, or of the persons exercising immediate supervision over him, are hereby prohibited.

Records show that before respondent married Caridad Justimbaste, daughter of then Mayor Priscilla Justimbaste, on December 16, 1993, the latter appointed him municipal assessor.  The appointment was permanent.   As stated earlier, petitioner approved it as temporary.  On December 1, 1994, Acting Mayor Luban extended to respondent (already the son-in-law of Mayor Justimbaste) a permanent appointment after his original temporary appointment expired. This new appointment was initially disapproved by petitioner. But respondent’s mother-in-law, Mayor Justimbaste, appealed to the CSC Regional Office No. VIII.   Being then the incumbent mayor, she was the chief of respondent and deemed to have recommended him to Vice-Mayor Luban to be appointed as municipal assessor.  Verily, such appointment is in violation of Section 59, Chapter 8 of the Civil Service Law, which provides:

“SEC. 59. Nepotism. – (1) All appointments in the national, provincial, city and municipal governments or in any branch or instrumentality thereof, including government-owned or controlled corporations, made in favor of a relative of the appointing or recommending authority, or of the chief of the bureau or office, or of the persons exercising immediate supervision over him, are hereby prohibited.

As used in this Section, the word ‘relative’ and members of the family referred to are those related within the third degree either of consanguinity or of affinity.

x x x.”

Petitioner has the power to recall an appointment in violation of civil service law, rules and regulations.   Section 20, Rule VI of the Omnibus Rules Implementing Book V (Civil Service) of the Administrative Code of 1987, provides:

“SEC. 20. – Notwithstanding the initial approval of an appointment, the same may be recalled on any of the following grounds:

x x x

(d) violation of other existing civil service law, rules and regulations.”

In Mathay, Jr. vs. Civil Service Commission,[19] we held that the Civil Service Commission is empowered to take appropriate action on all appointments and other personnel actions and that such power “includes the authority to recall an appointment initially approved in disregard of applicable provisions of the Civil Service law and regulations.”

http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2005/feb2005/154898.htm

Advertisements

About Erineus

Born on December 28, 1965, Surallah, South Cotabato, Southern Mindanao, Philippines.
This entry was posted in Administrative Law, Civil Service Law. Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s