Buena v.

Benito
G.R. No. 181760, 14 October 2014

DIGEST BY: Mac Duguiang Jr.

PETITIONER: ATTY. ANACLETO B. BUENA, JR., MNSA, in his capacity as Regional Director of Regional
Office No. XVI, Civil Service Commission
RESPONDENT: DR. SANGCAD D. BENITO

TOPIC: Mandamus
SUMMARY:
 Respondent Benito was appointed as Assistant Schools Division Superintendent by the Regional
Governor of the ARMM
 To make the appointment permanent, the Regional Governor requested the Civil Service
Commission Regional Office for the ARMM to attest to Dr. Benito’s permanent appointment.
 However, the CSC Regional Office denied the appointment stating that Dr. Benito did not
possess the career executive service eligibility required.
 Thus, Dr. Benito filed a petition for mandamus arguing that:
o The position does not require career executive service eligibility.
o And since the Regional Governor, as the appointing authority, already exercised his
discretion, it was the Regional Office’s ministerial duty to attest to his appointment.
 The petition for mandamus was eventually granted by the RTC which held that:
o Only "director positions" in ARMM require career executive service eligibility.
 Before the CA, the Regional Office failed to file the required memorandum after 30 days.
o Thus, the CA declared the Regional Office’s appeal abandoned and dismissed.
 Thus, the Regional Office filed a petition for certiorari before the SC

The issue is whether or not the mandamus should prosper --- NO

 On the rules on mandamus
o For mandamus to lie, the act sought to be enjoined must be a ministerial act or duty. 
 An act is ministerial if the act should be performed "in a prescribed manner, in
obedience to the mandate of a legal authority, without regard to or the exercise
of judgment upon the propriety or impropriety of the act done."
 On the procedural aspect
o Dr. Benito availed himself of the correct remedy.
o Although as a general rule, a party must exhaust all administrative remedies before
resorting to courts, one exception to this rule is when the issue involved is purely a legal
question.
o In this case, Dr. Benito need not to appeal before the Civil Service Commission as the
question on whether or not the position for which he was appointed requires career
executive service eligibility is a pure question of law.
 On the merits of the petition
o The Court held that the mandamus shall not prosper as it was not ministerial for the CSC
to attest the appointment of Benito when he did not meet the required eligibility.
o The questioned position of Assistant Schools Division Superintendent belongs to the
Career Executive Service, as provided by law.
 o And permanent appointment to positions in the Career Executive Service presupposes
that the appointee has passed the Career Executive Service examinations.
o In this case, Dr. Benito failed to meet said requirement at the time he was appointed
Assistant Schools Division Superintendent.
o Consequently, he cannot be appointed in a permanent capacity to the position.

DOCTRINE:
 For a mandamus to lie, the act sought to be enjoined must be a ministerial act or duty.
 An act is ministerial if the act should be performed "in a prescribed manner, in obedience to the
mandate of a legal authority, without regard to or the exercise of judgment upon the propriety
or impropriety of the act done."

FACTS:
 The Regional Governor of ARMM appointed Dr. Sangcad Benito as Assistant Schools Division
Superintendent of the Department of Education, Division of Lanao del Sur-I, in a temporary
capacity. 
o He was later reappointed as Assistant Schools Division Superintendent, this time in a
permanent capacity. 

 To change the status of Dr. Benito’s appointment from temporary to permanent, the Regional
Governor requested the Civil Service Commission Regional Office for the ARMM to attest to Dr.
Benito’s permanent appointment. 

 However, the Regional Office of CSC, through Regional Director Buena, returned the
appointment stating that:
o Dr. Benito did not possess the career executive service eligibility required for the
position of Assistant Schools Division Superintendent.

 Thus, Dr. Benito filed a petition for mandamus with the RTC to compel the Regional Office to
attest to his permanent appointment as Assistant Schools Division Superintendent.
o He argued that:
 the position does not belong to the Career Executive Service under Book V, Title
I, Subtitle A, Chapter 2, Section 7(3) of the Administrative Code of 1987. 
 Consequently, the position of Assistant Schools Division Superintendent does
not require career executive service eligibility.
 Under Article VII, Section 19 of Republic Act No. 9054, the Regional Governor of
the Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao is the appointing authority for
positions in the civil service in the region.
 Since the appointing authority already exercised his discretion, it was
the Regional Office’s ministerial duty to attest to his appointment. 

 In his answer, the Regional Director claimed that:

o The position of Assistant Schools Division Superintendent meets the following criteria
for positions in the Career Executive Service:
 The position is career, ranks higher than Division Chief, has a salary grade of 25,
and entails performance of executive and managerial functions and supervisory
responsibility over a division.
 o The permanent appointee to the position must, therefore, have career executive service
eligibility.
o And until the region enacts its own regional civil service law, the Regional Office shall
carry on with the Civil Service Commission’s mandate under the Constitution to promote
and enforce civil service laws and rules.

 The RTC ruled in favor of Dr. Benito and held that:

o the position of Assistant Schools Division Superintendent does not require career
executive service eligibility
o Under Civil Service Commission Resolution No. 021011, only "director positions" in
ARMM require career executive service eligibility.

 But on reconsideration, the trial court reversed itself and granted the Regional Office’s notice of
appeal.

 On appeal by Benito, the Regional Office failed to file the required memorandum after 30 days.
o Thus, the CA declared the Regional Office’s appeal abandoned and dismissed.

 The Regional Office, through the Office of the Solicitor General, filed a motion for
reconsideration, citing the Associate Solicitor’s alleged heavy workload as an excuse.

 But CA denied the Regional Office’s motion for reconsideration noting that:
o the Regional Office took 7 months and 22 days to file a memorandum with the Court of
Appeals

 Thus, the Regional Office filed a petition for review on Certiorari.

 The Regional Office argues that:

o the trial court erred in taking cognizance of respondent Dr. Benito’s petition for
mandamus.
 A petition for mandamus, according to the Regional Office, is filed only when
there is no other plain, speedy, and adequate remedy in the ordinary course of
law.
 In this case, appeal to the Civil Service Commission proper was still available.
o the position of Assistant Schools Division Superintendent requires career executive
service eligibility, pursuant to Civil Service Commission Resolution No. 021011.
 Since the resolution does not distinguish between a holder of a government
position in the ARMM and one in a regular agency of the national government,
the qualifications for positions in the national government must apply to
positions in ARMM.

ISSUES:
W/N the petition for mandamus should be sustained - NO

Discussion of rules on mandamus

 For mandamus to lie, the act sought to be enjoined must be a ministerial act or duty. 
 o An act is ministerial if the act should be performed "in a prescribed manner, in
obedience to the mandate of a legal authority, without regard to or the exercise of
judgment upon the propriety or impropriety of the act done."
 TLDR: The tribunal, corporation, board, officer, or person must have no choice
but to perform the act specifically enjoined by law.

On procedural aspect

 The Regional Office argues that:

o respondent Dr. Benito availed himself of the wrong remedy considering that the plain,
speedy, and adequate remedy of appeal to the Civil Service Commission proper was still
available.

 The Court disagreed and held that Dr. Benito availed himself of the correct remedy.

 General Rule: a party must exhaust all administrative remedies to give the administrative agency
an opportunity to decide the matter and to prevent unnecessary and premature resort to the
courts.

 Exception: A party may directly resort to judicial remedies if any of the following is present:
o when there is a violation of due process;
o when the issue involved is purely a legal question;
o when the administrative action is patently illegal amounting to lack or excess of
jurisdiction;
o when there is estoppel on the part of the administrative agency concerned;
o when there is irreparable injury;
o when the respondent is a department secretary whose acts as an alter ego of the
President bear the implied and assumed approval of the latter;
o when to require exhaustion of administrative remedies would be unreasonable;
o when it would amount to a nullification of a claim;
o when the subject matter is a private land in land case proceedings;
o when the rule does not provide a plain, speedy and adequate remedy; and
o when there are circumstances indicating the urgency of judicial intervention. 74

 In this case, the question is whether the position for which he was appointed requires career
executive service eligibility.
o This is a purely legal question which is an exception to the rule on exhaustion of
administrative remedies.

 All told, respondent Dr. Benito did not err in filing a petition for mandamus with the trial court.

On merits
 In the context of attestation of appointments in the civil service, the Civil Service Commission’s
attestation is a ministerial duty once it finds the appointee eligible for the position.
o If the appointee possesses the required civil service eligibility, the Commission has "no
choice but to attest to the appointment."
o In this case, the invoked eligibility is Career Executive Service Eligibility
 To determine whether a position belongs to the Career Executive Service, the Career Executive
Service Board issued Resolution No. 945 dated June 14, 2011 which provides the following
criteria:
o The position is career;
o The position is above division chief; and
o The position entails performance of executive and managerial functions.

 Applying these principles in this case, it was held that the position of Assistant Schools Division
Superintendent belongs to the Career Executive Service.
o The position of Assistant Schools Division Superintendent is a career position.
 Appointment to the position is based on merit and fitness and gives the
appointee an opportunity for advancement to higher career positions.
 If permanently appointed, the appointee is guaranteed security of tenure.

o The position is above Division Chief.

 An Assistant Schools Division Superintendent has a salary grade of 25.

o The Assistant Schools Division Superintendent assists the Schools Division

Superintendent in performing executive and managerial functions.
 These functions include:
 Developing and implementing division education development plans;
 Planning and managing the effective and efficient use of all personnel;
 Hiring, placing and evaluating all division supervisors and schools district
supervisors and employees in the division;
 Monitoring the utilization of funds;
 Ensuring compliance of quality standards for basic education programs;
 Supervising the operations of all public and private elementary,
secondary and integrated schools, and learning centers.

 In fact, the law recognizes that the position of Assistant Schools Division Superintendent belongs
to the Career Executive Service.
o Section 7 of Republic Act No. 9155 explicitly provides that an appointee to the position
must be a career executive service officer:
 SEC. 7. Powers, Duties and Functions. –
No appointment to the positions of regional directors, assistant regional
directors, schools division superintendents and assistant schools
division superintendents shall be made unless the appointee is a career
executive service officer who preferably shall have risen from the ranks.

 It is settled, therefore, that the position of Assistant Schools Division Superintendent belongs to
the Career Executive Service.
o And permanent appointment to positions in the Career Executive Service presupposes
that the appointee has passed the Career Executive Service examinations.

 In this case, respondent Dr. Benito did not possess the required civil service eligibility at the time
he was appointed Assistant Schools Division Superintendent.
 o Consequently, he cannot be appointed in a permanent capacity to the position.
o Thus, the Civil Service Commission cannot be compelled through a writ of mandamus to
attest to the permanent appointment of respondent Dr. Benito.

RULING:
WHEREFORE, the petition for review on certiorari is GRANTED. The Regional Trial ·court, Branch 9, Lanao
del Sur's September 12, 2005 decision in Special Civil Action Case No. 1538-05 is SET ASIDE.