Toledo vs. Civil Service Commission GRN 92646-47; October 4,1991 Petitioner Atty.

Augusto Toledo was appointed by then Comelec Chairman Ramon Felipe as Manager of the Education and Information epartment of the Comelec! on May "#! #$%& At the time of his appointment! petitioner! ha'ing been born on (uly %! #$") was already more than fifty*se'en +,)- year old. It was the first time petitioner .oined the go'ernment ser'ice as he was then engaged in acti'e pri'ate practice prior to appointment. Petitioner/s appointment papers! particularly Ci'il 0er'ice! Form 1o. 222 and his oath of office were endorsed by the Comelec to the Ci'il 0er'ice Commission +C0C! bre'ity on (une ##! #$%&! for appro'al and attestation. 3owe'er! no prior re4uest for e5emption from the pro'isions of 0ection ""! Rule III of the Ci'il 0er'ice Rules on Personnel Action and Policies +C0RPAP! for bre'ity- was secured. 0aid pro'ision prohibits the appointment of persons ,) years old or abo'e into the go'ernment ser'ice without prior appro'al by the Ci'il 0er'ice Commission +C0C Memorandum Circular 1o. ,! 0eries of #$%2-. Petitioner officially reported for wor6 and assumed the functions of his office on (une #&! #$%&. 7n (anuary "$! #$%$! public respondent Comelec! upon disco'ery of the lac6 of authority re4uired under 0ection ""! Rule III of the C0RPAP! and C0C Memorandum Circular 1o., 0eries of #$%2 issued Resolution 1o. "8&&! the pertinent portion of which is hereinbelow 4uoted! to wit9 :;3EREA0! for the 'alidity then of the appointment of Atty. Toledo as Manager of the Education and Inforination epartment was necessary that not only must prior authority from the Ci'il 0er'ice Commission be obtained considering that he was more than fifty*se'en +,)- years old at the time! it must as well be shown that the e5igencies of the ser'ice so re4uired! +bAtty. Toledo possesses special 4ualification not possessed by other officers or employees n the Commission! and +c- the 'acancy cannot be filled by promotion of 4ualified officers or employees in the Commission< :;3EREA0! there is nothing in the #"8 File of Atty. Toledo that indicates that such authority was e'en obtained from the Ci'il 0er'ice Commission or from the President of the Philippines< moreo'er! conditions +a-! +b- and+c- stated in the immediately preceding clause did not e5ist< :;3EREA0! the appointment then of Arty. Toledo was made in 'iolation of law and pursuant to 0ection )! Rule III of the Ci'il 0er'ice Rules on Personnel Action! the appointment was 'oid from the beginning.

:17;! T3EREF7RE! be it resol'ed! as it is hereby resol'ed to EC=ARE as >7I from the beginning the appointment of Atty Augusto Toledo as Manager of the Education and Information epartment of this Commission.: +pp. ?$* ,8! Rollo- Petitioner appealed the foregoing Comelec Resolution 1o. "8&& to public respondent C0C on February ?! #$%$. 7n (uly #"! #$%$! public respondent C0C promulgated. Resolution 1o. %$*?&% which disposed of the appeal! thus9 /;3EREF7RE! foregoing premises considered! the Commission resol'ed to declare! as it hereby declares the appointment of Augusto >. Toledo as Manager! Information and Education epartment Commission on Elections! them being no basis in law! merely 'iodable and not 'oid ab initio. 3ence! Atty. Toledo is considered a de facto officer from the time he assumed office on (une #&! #$%&! until and up to the promulgation of C7ME=EC Resolution 1o. "8&& on (anuary "$! #$%$.: +pp. 2,*2&! Rollo@nable to obtain a reconsideration of the aforesaid Resolution! petitioner filed the present petition for certiorari. It is first contended by petitioner that C0C Resolution 1o.%$?&% is without legal basis because the C0RPAP is in'alid and unenforceable for not ha'ing been published in the 7fficial AaBette or in any newspaper of general circulation as re4uired under 0ection $+b- of P. . %8). This being the case! petitioner argues that the re4uirement of prior C0C authority to appoint persons ,) years or older under 0ection ""! Rule III of the C0RPAP has not :become effecti'e: and cannot be in'o6ed against him. It will be recalled that the Ci'il 0er'ice Act of #$,$ +Republic Act 1o. ""&8too6 effect on (une #$! #$,$. That act! among other things! established a Ci'il 0er'ice Commission one of the functions of which was! :with the appro'al by the President! to prescribe! amend! and enforce suitable rules and regulations for carrying into effect the pro'isions of 5 5 the Ci'il 0er'ice =aw!: said rules :to become effecti'e thirty days after publication in the 7fficial AaBette: C0ec. #& +e-D. The Commission subse4uently adopted and promulgated rules intended to carry the law into effect! 6nown as the Re'ised Ci'il 0er'ice Rules. Those rules were published in the supplement to >ol. ,%! 1o. ?$ of the 7fficial AaBette! dated 0eptember 2! #$&". 0ection ,! Rule >I of those Re'ised Ci'il 0er'ice Rules pro'ided that9 :0EC. ,. 1o person shall be appointed or reinstated in tht ser'ice if he is already ,) years old! unless the President of thu Philippines! President of the 0enate! 0pea6er of the 3ouse of Repre sentati'es! or the Chief (ustice of the 0upreme Court! as the case may be! determines that he possesses special

4ualifications and his ser 'ices are needed.: It is worthy of note! howe'er! that the statute itself +RA ""&8- contained no pro'ision prohibiting appointment or reinstatement in the Ao'ernment ser'ice of any person who was already ,) years old! or otherwise re4uiring that some limitation as regards to age be placed on employment in the Ao'ernment ser'ice. This prohibition was purely a creation of the Ci'il 0er'ice Commission. 7n 7ctober &! #$),! pursuant to the #$)2 Constitution! Presidential ecree 1o. %8) was issued by President Marcos! establishing :an independent Ci'il 0er'ice Commission.: The decree 6nown as the :Ci'il 0er'ice ecree of the Philippines!: repealed or accordingly modified all laws! rules! and regulations or parts thereof inconsistent: with its pro'isions +0ec. ,$-! although it declared that :the former Ci'il 0er'ice Commission created under Republic Act 1o. ""&8! as amended! and as organiBed under the Integrated ReorganiBation Plan may ser'e as the nucleus of the Ci'il 0er'ice Commission: +Fourth ;hereas Clause! Preamble-. =i6e RA ""&8 which it superseded! P %8) empowered the Commission to :prescribe! amend! and enforce suitable rules and regulations for carrying into effect the pro'isions of the ecree!: and also pro'ided that said :rules and regulations shall become effecti'e thirty +28- days after publication in the 7fficial AaBette or in arty newspaper of general circulation.: The new Ci'il 0er'ice Commission adopted :rules and regulations for carrying into effect the pro'isions: of the Ci'il 0er'ice ecree on 1o'ember "8! #$%2. The rules were named! :Ci'il 0er'ice Rules on Personnel Actions and Policies: +C0RPAP 0ection ""! Rule III of the C0RPAP is substantially the same as 0ection ,! Rule >I of the 4uondam :Re'ised Ci'il 0er'ice Rules: and it reads as follows9 :0EC. "". 1o person shall be appointed! reinstated! or re*employed in the ser'ice in the is already ,) years old! unless the President or the Chief (ustice of the 0upreme Court! in the case of employees in the .udiciary! determines that he possesses special 4ualifications urgently needed by the hiring agency.: 7mitted! it will be obser'ed! was reference to the :President of the 0enate: and the :0pea6er of the 3ouse of Representati'es!: both of whom were e5pressly mentioned in the counterpart pro'ision in the former rules +0ection ,! Rule >I! supra.-. 1oteworthy! too! is that there is no pro'ision at all in P %8) dealing in any manner with the appointment! reinstatement it or re*employment in the Ao'ernment ser'ice of any person already ,) years or any particular age! for that matter. Again in the pro'ision regarding persons ,) years of age was

purely a creation of the Commission! ha'ing no reference to any pro! ii! n in the decree intended to be implemented. It was this pro'ision of the C0RPAP +0ec. ""! Rule III- which was applied to Toledo. According to the C0C! since prior authority for Toledo/s appointment had ne'er been obtained*indeed! it would appear that the appointment papers were not transmitted by the C7ME=EC to the C0C until February #$%$ at which time Toledo/s appointment was :appro'ed as permanent: by the E5ecuti'e irector of said C0C*the appointment had to be struc6 down. 1ow! these rules and regulations +C0RPAP- were ne'er / published either in the 7fficial AaBette or any newspaper of general circulation! at least as of the time that 0ection ""! Rule IIIthereof was applied to Toledo to the latter/s pre.udice. As muchwas admitted by the Chairman of the Commission! 3er Fatri*cia A. 0to. Tomas in a letter written by her to Toledo dated February "! #$%$. In that letter! the Chairman stated that +a- the Commission had :no record of the publication of said Rules +:Rules on Personnel Actions and Policies:- in newspapers of general circulation: although said Rules were :published and distributed by the 1ational Media Production Center n #$),!: and that +b- only :the Rule on Promotion embodied in C0C Resolution 1o. %2* 2?2 repealing Rule > of the said Rules was published on August #,! #$%2 in >olume )$ 1o. 2 a/ the 7fficial AaBette: +Anne5 #! petition-. The lac6 of publication is also attested by the irector of the 1ational Printing 7ffice who in a Certification issued by him on (anuary "8! #$%$!stated that :the R@=E0 71 PER0711E= ACTI710 11 P7=ICIE0/ promulgated on 1o'ember "8! #$), by the Ci'il ser'ice Commission implementing Presidential ecree 1o. %8) was not submitted to this office for publication: +Anne5 (! petitionThe Re'ised Ci'il 0er'ice Rules implementing R.A. 1o. ""&8 cannot be considered 'alid and effecti'e after RA ""&8 was repealed and superseded by P %8). P %8) was ob'iously intended to ta6e the place of RA ""&8. In all matters dealt with by both laws! the pro'isions of P %8) were ob'iously intended to be controlling. 0o! also! the rules promulgated by the Ci'il 0er'ice Commission to carry the pro'isions of P %8) into effect were meant to supersede or ta6e the place of the rules implementing RA ""&8. In other words! P %8) and the C0RPAP were intended to ma6e RA ""&8 and its implementing rules functos officio! render them without force and effect e5cept only as regards any pro'ision! if at all! not dealt with by P %8) or the C0RPAP. 1ow! it can reasonably be assumed that the law*ma6ing at the time! the President! was aware of the pro'ision on ,)*year old persons in the Re'ised Ci'il 0er'ice Rules promulgated under RA ""&8. Eet when he promulgated P %8) the President did not see fit to incorporate therein any pro'ision regarding ,) *year old persons or for that matter! to prescribe age beyond which persons could become ineligible for appointment! reinstatement or re*

employment. This surely is an indication of an intention not to continue the pro'ision in effect. In any e'ent! the pro'ision on ,)*year old persons in the Re'ised Ci'il 0er'ice Rules +under said RA ""&8- cannot be accorded 'alidity. As already pointed out! it is entirely a creation of the Ci'il 0er'ice Commission! ha'ing no basis in the law itself which it was meant to implement. It cannot be related to or connected with any specific pro'ision of the law which it is meant to carry into effect! such as a re4uirement! for instance! that age should be rec6oned as a factor in the employment or reinstatement of an indi'idual! or a direction that there be a determination of some point in a person/s life at which he becomes unemployable! or employable only under specific conditions. It was therefore an unauthoriBed act of legislation on the part of the Ci'il 0er'ice Commission. It cannot be .ustified as a 'alid e5ercise of its function of promulgating rules and regulations for that function! to repeat! may legitimately be e5ercised only for the purpose of carrying the pro'isions of I he law into effect< and since there is no prohibition or restriction on the employment of ,)*year old persons in the statute*or any! pro'ision respecting age as a factor in employment*there was nothing to carry into effect through an implementing rule on the matter. The power 'ested in the Ci'il 0er'ice Commission we 2 to implement the law or put it into effect! not to add to it< to cat n! the law into effect or e5ecution! not to supply percei'ed omissions in it. :Fy its administrati'e regulations! of course! the # i'< itself can not be e5tended< said regulations /cannot amend an act of Congress.:/ +Teo5on '. Members of the Foard of Administrators! Philippine >eterans Administration! 22 0CRA ,%,! ,%$ C#$)8#! citing 0antos '. EstenBo! #8$ Phil. ?#$ #$&8D< see also Animos '. Philippine >eterans Affairs 7ffice! #)? 0CRA G =? ""2*""? C#$%$# in turn citing Teo5on-. The considerations .ust e5pounded also conduce to the con elusion of the in'alidity of 0ection ""! Rule III of the C0RPHIF The enactment of said section! relati'e to ,)*year old persons was also an act of supererogation on the part of the Ci'il 0er'ice! Commission since the rule has no relation to or connection with any pro'ision of the law supposed to be carried into effect. The section was an addition to or e5tension of the law! not merely it mode of carrying it into effect. Apart from this! the C0RPAP cannot be considered effecti'e as of the time of the application to Toledo of a pro'ision thereof! for the reason that said rules were ne'er published! as is admitted on all sides. The argument that the C0RPAP need not be published! because they were :a mere reiteration of e5isting law :and had been :circulariBed!: flies in the teeth of the e5plicit and categorical re4uirement of P %8) that rules and regulations for carrying into effect the pro'isions of the ecree ilia # become effecti'e thirty +28- days after publication in the 7fficial AaBette or in any newspaper of general

circulation.: Moreo'er! the C0RPAP cannot properly be considered a mere reiteration of e5isting law! for as already discussed! the implementing rule go'erning ,)*year old persons is in'alid and cannot in any sense be considered e5isting law. :Assuming without conceding that the rule regarding employment of ,)*year old persons is 'alid and enforceable! it can only apply! according to its e5press terms! to employees under the super'ision of the Chief (ustice of the 0upreme Court! or of the President of the Philippines! these two being the only officials mentioned as ha'ing to gi'e consent to the employment of said persons. It cannot be construed as applying to employees o'er whom neither the President nor the Chief (ustice e5ercises super'ision! such as the 0enate or the 3ouse of Representati'es! or the C7ME=EC or other Constitutional Commissions. 7ne last word! there is absolutely no 4uestion about the fact that the only reason for Toledo/s separation from the ser'ice was the fact that he was already more than ,) years old when he was in'ited to wor6 in the C7ME=EC by its former Chairman! but through no fault of his own! not all the conditions for his employment appear to ha'e been satisfied. There is no 4uestion that it was not Toledo/s fault that his papers were tardily submitted to the Ci'il 0er'ice Commission and appro'al of his appointment was made only by the E5ecuti'e irector of the Commission and not by the Chairman thereof +to whom the function of the President of appro'ing appointments li6e those of Toledo had been delegated under =7I ?)! C0C Memo Circular 1o. ,! 0eries of #$%2-. There is no 4uestion! too! that he was acti'ely engaged in law practice when ta6en into the C7ME=EC. There is absolutely no 4uestion about the fact that he was otherwise a competent and efficient officer of the C7ME=EC and had not gi'en the remotest case for dismissal. These are e4uitable considerations proscribing application to him of the pro'ision in 4uestion! assuming its 'alidity! or impelling at least a restricti'e application thereof so that it may not wor6 to his pre.udice. Premises considered! the petition is hereby ARA1TE . 07 7R ERE . Petition granted.