VILLEGAS V. SUBIDO, G.R. NO.

L-31711, SEPTEMBER 30,

1971

Topic- Irreconcilable inconsistency between two laws with similar subject

matter

Facts:
1. June 3, 1968, Eduardo Romualdez, Secretary of Finance, authorized Jose Gloria of the Office of
the City Treasurer of Manila to assume the duties of Assistant City Treasurer.

2. On the other hand, petitioner Antonio Villegas, Mayor of the City of Manila, issued an
administrative order directed to Gloria to “desist and refrain from exercising the duties and
functions of Asst. Treasurer”, on the grounds that respondent Romualdez “is not empowered to
make such designations.”

3. On Jan 1, 1969, Mayor Villegas appointed Manuel Lapid as Assistant City Treasurer in the
grounds of a provision in the Decentralization Act of 1967.

4. However, upon the 1st endorsement, Abelardo Subido, Civil Service Commissioner, disapproved
the Appointment of Lapid on the basis that the appointment of Asst City Treasurer is still
governed by the Charter of the City of Manila and Section 2088 (A) of the Revised
Administrative Code.

Issue:

Whether or not the Charter of the City of Manila and Section 2088 (A) of the Revised Administrative
Code had been impliedly repealed by Decentralization Act of 1967 which authorizes the City Mayor to
appoint the Assistant City Treasurer

Ruling:

No, the Decentralization Act of 1967 do not impliedly repeal the Charter of the City of Manila and
Revised Administrative Code.

The provision in the Decentralization Act of 1967 that the petitioners invoke states that “all other
employees, except teachers, paid out of provincial, city or municipal general funds, subject to civil
service law, rules and regulations, be appointed by the provincial governor, city or municipality”.
However, the Revised Administrative Code distinguishes “an employee from an officer to
designate those whose duties, not being of a clerical or manual nature, may be considered to involve
the exercise of discretion in the performance of the functions of government”. In this case, the
Assistant City Treasurer is an officer.
It is also expressly stated in the Charter of the City of Manila that the President of the Philippines,
with the consent of the CA, the power to appoint the Assistant City Treasurer.
Also, Section 4 of the Decentralization Act specifically enumerates the officials and their assistants
the Mayor cannot appoint which includes city treasurers.

The SC in this case ruled that repeals by implication are not favoured and will not be declared unless
it be manifest that the legislature so intended.

Note: Two requisites before a repeal is deemed to exist:

1. It must be shown that the statute or statutory provisions deal with the same subject matter;
2. The latter is inconsistent with the former. (i.e. The language used in the latter statute must be
such as to render it irreconcilable with what had been formerly enacted).

An inconsistency that falls short of that standard does not suffice. What is needed is a
manifest indication of the legislative purpose to repeal.