Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence


Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence > Year 1963 > November 1963 Decisions > G.R. No. L-21117 November 29, 1963 - NAPOLEON F. RONQUILLO v. RAFAEL GALANO:




PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

EN BANC

[G.R. No. L-21117. November 29, 1963.]

NAPOLEON F. RONQUILLO, Petitioner, v. RAFAEL GALANO, Respondent.

Antonio Barredo and Ma. Salud V. Parreño for Petitioner.

Ambrosio Padilla Law Offices and Francisco Astilla for Respondent.


SYLLABUS


1. PUBLIC OFFICERS; APPOINTMENTS; APPOINTMENT TO A POSITION NOT VACANT ON THAT DATE, INEFFECTIVE. — An appointment to the position of Justice of the Peace, extended to petitioner who took his oath of office to the questioned post when the same has not yet been vacated by the incumbent is improperly made and is ineffective.

2. ID.: ID.; ID.; PETITIONER’S AD INTERIM APPOINTMENT COVERED BY THE PRINCIPLE ENUNCIATED IN THE CASE OF AYTONA v. CASTILLO. — Petitioner was one of those whose appointments were submitted to the Commission on Appointments on December 29, 1961. His ad interim appointment was extended on November 6, 1961. He had to make a trip to Manila on December 29, 1961 just to take his oath of office, instead of waiting for the receipt of his appointment in the ordinary course of mail as in ordinary cases. HELD: His appointment falls under the principle and theory of the case of Aytona v. Castillo, L-19313, January 22, 1962, and the appointment is to be considered withdrawn by Administrative Order No. 2 of President Macapagal, dated January 1, 1962.

3. SPECIAL CIVIL ACTION; QUO WARRANTO; DISMISSAL THEREOF WHERE PETITIONER HAS NO VALID CLAIM TO THE OFFICE. — A petition for quo warranto is to be dismissed where the petitioner has no valid claim to the office, his appointment thereto having been extended at a time that the position was not vacant and the same having been considered withdrawn by President Macapagal, dated January 1, 1962.


D E C I S I O N


LABRADOR, J.:


This is an original petition for quo warranto filed against respondent by the petitioner who alleges that he is the duly appointed Justice of the Peace of Maripipi, Leyte, assuming office on January 8, 1962, his ad interim appointment on November 6, 1961 having been confirmed by the Commission on Appointments on April 27, 1962. Petitioner further alleges that on October 11, 1962 His Excellency President Macapagal extended another ad interim appointment in favor of respondent Rafael Galano and the latter took his oath of office on January 18, 1963. It is argued in the petition that as the position of Justice of the Peace of Maripipi, Leyte was not vacant when respondent was appointed, because it was being held by petitioner who had not resigned nor had been removed from office, respondent’s appointment to the aforementioned position is without authority of law and therefore null and void.

The answer of the respondent alleges that the appointment of petitioner to the position of Justice of the Peace of Maripipi, Leyte on November 6, 1961 is null and void because said position was not vacant on that date, Atty. Wenceslao M. Polo, past incumbent, having remained holding that position or office until December 29, 1961, when Polo assumed office as Assistant Provincial Fiscal of Leyte, that even though the petitioner’s appointment was dated November 6, 1961 it was not released until December 29, 1961; that petitioner’s appointment was an ad interim appointment which was withdrawn by Administrative Order No. 2 of President Macapagal and declared without effect on January 1, 1962, the validity of said administrative order having been upheld in the case of Aytona v. Castillo, G.R. No. L-19313, January 22, 1962. It is therefore maintained that under the circumstances above indicated petitioner has no valid claim to the office and that he had been usurping said office illegally.

The documents submitted by both petitioner and respondent show that while petitioner’s appointment to the position of Justice of the Peace of Maripipi, Leyte is dated November 6, 1961 (Annex B to the Petition) the same was not released until December 29, 1961; that upon its release on the said date petitioner immediately took his oath of office before the Judicial Superintendent of the Department of Justice; that petitioner took the oath of office on December 29, 1961, but a certificate of the then Acting Justice of the Peace Wenceslao M. Polo issued on December 29, 1961 is to the effect that on that date he (Polo) was still the Justice of the Peace of the municipality of Maripipi (Annex 2-A to the Answer) and had not yet been released from his property responsibility (Annex 3 to the Answer).

We have consulted the expediente of the case of Aytona v. Castillo, supra, and We find that petitioner is one of those whose appointments were submitted to the Commission of Appointments on December 29, 1961. It is clear that when petitioner was extended the appointment on November 6, 1961 and when he took his oath of office to the position he was appointed to on December 29, 1961, the position in question was not yet vacated by the incumbent Wenceslao M. Polo. It also appears from the petition that petitioner, who is a resident of Maripipi, Leyte, had to make a trip to Manila on December 29, 1961 just to take his oath of office, instead of waiting for the receipt of his appointment in the ordinary course of mail as in ordinary cases. Under the above circumstances We are forced to find, as we hereby declare, that this appointment falls under the principle and theory of the case of Aytona v. Castillo, supra, and the appointment is to be considered withdrawn by Administrative Order No. 2 of 1962 of President Macapagal, which order this Court has refused to declare invalid. Petitioner’s appointment, therefore, if not improperly made was lawfully withdrawn on January 2, 1962, and the same has become ineffective since then.

IN VIEW OF THE FOREGOING CONSIDERATIONS, the petition should be as it hereby is dismissed, with costs against the petitioner. So ordered.

Bengzon, C.J., Padilla, Bautista Angelo, Reyes, J.B.L., Paredes, Dizon, Regala and Makalintal, JJ., concur.

Concepcion, J., concurs in the result.

Barrera, J., took no part.




Back to Home | Back to Main




















chanrobles.com





ChanRobles On-Line Bar Review

ChanRobles Internet Bar Review : www.chanroblesbar.com

ChanRobles MCLE On-line

ChanRobles Lawnet Inc. - ChanRobles MCLE On-line : www.chanroblesmcleonline.com






November-1963 Jurisprudence                 

  • G.R. No. L-21124 November 8, 1963 - JESUS JIMENEZ, SR. v. MARGARITO LOFRANCO

  • G.R. No. L-21135 November 8, 1963 - DELFIN PROTACIO v. ELEUTERIO DE LEON, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-21578 November 8, 1963 - GABRIEL ROLDAN v. PEDRO MONSANTO

  • G.R. No. L-21910 November 11, 1963 - ASUNCION CONUI-OMEGA v. CESAR SAMSON

  • G.R. No. L-18081 November 18, 1963 - SSS EMPLOYEES ASSO. (PAFLU) v. HON. JUDGE E. SORIANO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-19083 November 22, 1963 - HADJI TAHER COROCORO v. HADJI SINAL BASCARA

  • G.R. No. L-21228 November 22, 1963 - NICETAS FELISILDA v. CRISPULO ACHACOSO

  • G.R. No. L-11615 November 29, 1963 - REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL. v. TOMAS MARQUEZ

  • G.R. No. L-13687 November 29, 1963 - REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL. v. SEGUNDO SIOSON, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 16757 November 29, 1963 - J. M. TUASON & CO., INC. v. CORNELIO M. AGUILA

  • G.R. No. L-17321 November 29, 1963 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. SANTOS DONIEGO

  • G.R. No. L-17724 November 29, 1963 - RAMON B. MELENDEZ v. TOMASA LAVARIAS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-17797 November 29, 1963 - ISABELO CARPIO v. HIGINIO MACADAEG, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-17821 November 29, 1963 - PRIMITIVO LOVINA, ET AL. v. FLORENCIO MORENO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-18005 November 29, 1963 - LU BENG GA v. REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL.

  • G.R. No. L-18540 November 29, 1963 - MUN. OF NAGUILIAN v. NAWASA

  • G.R. No. L-18568 November 29, 1963 - PEOPLE’S SURETY AND INS. CO, INC., v. GABRIEL & SONS TRANS. CO., INC., ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-18882 November 29, 1963 - CLAUDIA MEJIA, ET AL. v. CASILDA M. DE MEJIA

  • G.R. No. L-19275 November 29, 1963 - MAXIMO FERRAREN v. RAMON B. AÑONUEVO

  • G.R. No. L-19436 November 29, 1963 - CELESTINA B. RAMOS, ET AL. v. LAUREANO POTENCIANO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-19558 November 29, 1963 - LA MALLORCA and PAMPANGA BUS CO., INC. v. CIRILO D. MENDIOLA

  • G.R. No. L-20033 November 29, 1963 - DOMICIANO F. VALER v. CELERINO O. BRIONES

  • G.R. No. L-20370 November 29, 1963 - CONRADO ESPINOSA SIGUIENTE v. SEC. OF JUSTICE, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-20485 November 29, 1963 - DEMETRIO M. BATARIO, JR. v. JOSE J. PARENTELA, JR.

  • G.R. No. L-20597 November 29, 1963 - LU CHOY FA, ET AL. v. COMMISSIONER OF IMMIGRATION

  • G.R. No. L-21068 November 29, 1963 - NARCISO D. SALCEDO v. JUAN R. LIWAG, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-21117 November 29, 1963 - NAPOLEON F. RONQUILLO v. RAFAEL GALANO

  • G.R. No. L-17169 November 30, 1963 - ISIDRO C. ANG-ANGCO v. NATALIO P. CASTILLO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-18456 November 30, 1963 - CONRADO P. NAVARRO v. RUFINO G. PINEDA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-18775 November 30, 1963 - LO SAN TUANG v. EMILIO L. GALANG

  • G.R. No. L-18860 November 30, 1963 - CARLOS AVENDAÑO v. LADISLAO PASICOLAN, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-20015 November 30, 1963 - SULPICIO GADON v. PEDRO GADON