Case No.

8
MARY CHRISTINE B. LUZANDE
PhD-ELM
ELM 502 – EDUCATIONAL LEADERSHIP & MANAGEMENT IN EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS
DR. DANILO S. HILARIO
Title:

Discretionary
Power
 3

Assume that a vacancy exist in the office of

the regional director in a certain region
and the Secretary filled the vacant position
Facts of the Case
by reinstatement on the ground that the
assistant regional director is a widower and
is living with a woman without benefit of
marriage. The assistant director protested
the appointment with the Civil Service
Commission on the ground that the reason
given is not job-related.
 4

ISSUE
Is the by-passing of the
regional director valid? What
does the law provide in filling
a vacancy in the professional
level?
 “
5

Decision
Is the by-passing of the regional
director valid?

YES
 6

In Umoso v. Civil Service

Commission, G.R. No. 110276,. The
appointing power is vested in the
Department Head/Secretary. Such
power, however, may be delegated to
the regional director subject to the
approval, revision, modification and
reversal of the Department Secretary.
 7

Consequently, the appointing

authority has the right of choice which
he may exercise freely according to his
best judgment, deciding for himself who
is best qualified among those who have
the necessary qualifications and
eligibilities. The final choice of the
appointing authority should be
respected and left undisturbed.
 “
8

What does the law provide

in filling a vacancy in the
professional levels?
 9

In PD 807, Section 7. Classes of

Positions in the Career Service.
Professional levels are under the second
level thus specifically:
2. The second level shall include
professional, technical, and scientific
positions which involve professional,
technical, or scientific work in a non-
supervisory or supervisory capacity
requiring at least four years of college.
 10

Section 21, paragraphs 2

and 3 of the Civil Service Law
provide for the next-in-rank rule:
SEC. 21. Recruitment and Selection
of Employees
 (3) When a vacancy occurs in a11
position in the second level of the
Career Service as defined in Section 8,
the employees in the government
service who occupy the next lower
positions in the occupational group
under which the vacant position is
classified and in other functionally
related occupational groups and who
are competent, qualified and with the
appropriate civil service eligibility shall
be considered for promotion.
 Employees next in rank are those12
“who occupy the next lower positions in
the occupational group under which the
vacant position is classified, and in other
functionally related occupational groups
and who are competent, qualified and
with the appropriate civil service
eligibility. 1987 ADM. CODE, book V, title
I, subtitle A, chapter 5, sec. 21, pars. (2)
and (3).
 Still, the next-in-rank rule is a13
rule of preference on who to
consider for promotion. Espanol v.
Civil Service Commission, G.R. No.
85479
The rule does not give
employees next in rank a vested
right to the position next higher to
theirs should that position become
vacant. Ibid.
 Appointment is a discretionary
14

power of the appointing authority.

Abila v. Civil Service Commission,
G.R. No. 92573
So as long as the appointee
possesses the qualifications required
by the law, the appointment is valid.
Taduran v. Commissioner of Civil
Service, G.R. No. L-5205
 IMPLICATION
TO
EDUCATIONAL
MANAGEMENT
 While many factors are taken into 16
account in evaluating the qualifications of
Principle of prospective appointees and that formal
authority and examinations, work experience and
educational attainment are only some of
responsibility them. Such abstract criteria as loyalty,
cordiality, initiative, resourcefulness,
discipline and other personality traits are
also property considered. When making
this evaluation, the appointing authority
are given the widest possible leeway and
cannot be controlled by the Commission.
 The exercise of this discretion as17
an appointing authority can be subjected
to abuse. Firstly, the administrative
Management
authority might fail to exercise the
Implication authority vested in it. Secondly, the
authorities might exercise this discretion
incorrectly that is, with improper
motives, bias or under the influence of
another body. (Lawteacher,net). But
unfortunately that is the law. Safeguard
measures should be observed.
 18

Abila v. Civil Service Commission, G.R. No. 92573, (1991)

Espanol v. Civil Service Commission, G.R. No. 85479, March3, 1992,

REFERENCES: Taduran v. Commissioner of Civil Service, G.R. No. L-52051 216 Phil. 57
(1984)

‘The Abuse of Administrative Discretion’ (Lawteacher.net, August 2018)

https://www.lawteacher.net/free-law-essays/administrative-law/the-abuse-of-
administrative-discretion-adm
inistrative-law-essay.php

Umoso v. Civil Service Commission, 234 SCRA 617 (1994)

The Revised Administrative Code of 1987 on the Civil Service Commission

PRESIDENTIAL DECREE No. 807 October 6, 1975

 19

Thank You!