Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 70 views

    Organizational Structure The Commission May Effect Changes in The Organization As The Need Arises

    Uploaded by

    Abbie Medina
    This case involved a challenge to the Civil Service Commission's (CSC) abolition of the Career Executive Service Board (CESB) rank. The petitioner was a Deputy Director who had been recommended for a CESB rank but that rank was then abolished by the CSC. The Supreme Court ruled that the CSC did not have the power to abolish the CESB rank as the CESB was created by Presidential Decree and could only be abolished by the legislature. While the CSC has the power to reorganize offices under its control as enumerated in law, the CESB was intended to be an autonomous entity administratively attached to but not under the control of the CSC. Therefore, the abolition of

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Organizational Structure The Commission May Effect Changes in The Organization As The Need Arises

    Uploaded by

    Abbie Medina
    70 views3 pages
    This case involved a challenge to the Civil Service Commission's (CSC) abolition of the Career Executive Service Board (CESB) rank. The petitioner was a Deputy Director who had been recommended for a CESB rank but that rank was then abolished by the CSC. The Supreme Court ruled that the CSC did not have the power to abolish the CESB rank as the CESB was created by Presidential Decree and could only be abolished by the legislature. While the CSC has the power to reorganize offices under its control as enumerated in law, the CESB was intended to be an autonomous entity administratively attached to but not under the control of the CSC. Therefore, the abolition of

    Original Title

    Eugenio

    Copyright

    © Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    This case involved a challenge to the Civil Service Commission's (CSC) abolition of the Career Executive Service Board (CESB) rank. The petitioner was a Deputy Director who had been recommended for a CESB rank but that rank was then abolished by the CSC. The Supreme Court ruled that the CSC did not have the power to abolish the CESB rank as the CESB was created by Presidential Decree and could only be abolished by the legislature. While the CSC has the power to reorganize offices under its control as enumerated in law, the CESB was intended to be an autonomous entity administratively attached to but not under the control of the CSC. Therefore, the abolition of

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    70 views3 pages

    Organizational Structure The Commission May Effect Changes in The Organization As The Need Arises

    Uploaded by

    Abbie Medina
    This case involved a challenge to the Civil Service Commission's (CSC) abolition of the Career Executive Service Board (CESB) rank. The petitioner was a Deputy Director who had been recommended for a CESB rank but that rank was then abolished by the CSC. The Supreme Court ruled that the CSC did not have the power to abolish the CESB rank as the CESB was created by Presidential Decree and could only be abolished by the legislature. While the CSC has the power to reorganize offices under its control as enumerated in law, the CESB was intended to be an autonomous entity administratively attached to but not under the control of the CSC. Therefore, the abolition of

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 3

    EUGENIO ASTURIAS Admin Law Case Digest. EUGENIO V.

    CSC

    Facts: The petitioner assails the power of the CSC to abolish the CESO Rank. Petitioner while being the Deputy Director of the Phil. Nuclear Research Institute, she was then given a CES Eligibility and eventually recommended being a CESO, Rank IV. Subsequently, a resolution was passed by the CSC abolishing said rank which impaired the petitioner to that position. Issue: Whether or not CSC has the power to abolish the CES Board? Held: Granted.

    Ruling: The controlling fact is that the Career Executive Service Board (CESB) was created in the Presidential Decree (P.D.) No. 1 on September 1, 1974 4 which adopted the Integrated Plan. It cannot be disputed, therefore, that as the CESB was created by law, it can only be abolished by the legislature. This follows an unbroken stream of rulings that the creation and abolition of public offices is primarily a legislative function.In the petition at bench, the legislature has not enacted any law authorizing the abolition of the CESB. On the contrary, in all the General Appropriations Acts from 1975 to 1993, the legislature has set aside funds for the operation of CESB. Respondent Commission, however, invokes Section 17, Chapter 3, Subtitle A. Title I, Book V of the Administrative Code of 1987 as the source of its power to abolish the CESB. Section 17 provides: Sec. 17. Organizational Structure. Each office of the Commission shall be headed by a Director with at least one Assistant Director, and may have such divisions as are necessary independent constitutional body, the Commission may effect changes in

    the organization as the need arises.


    But as well pointed out by petitioner and the Solicitor General, Section 17 must be read together with Section 16 of the said Code which enumerates the offices under the respondent Commission.As read together, the inescapable conclusion is that respondent Commission's power to reorganize is limited to offices under its control as enumerated in Section 16. From its inception, the CESB was intended to be an autonomous entity, albeit administratively attached to respondent Commission. As conceptualized by the Reorganization Committee "the CESB shall be autonomous.The essential autonomous character of the CESB is not negated by its attachment to respondent Commission. By said attachment, CESB was not made to fall within the control of respondent Commission. Under the Administrative Code of 1987, the purpose

    of attaching one functionally inter-related government agency to another is to attain "policy and program coordination."

    Makati Stock Exchange, Inc. V. SEC Facts: The SEC in its resolution, denied the Makati Stock Exchange, Inc permission to operate a stock exchange unless it agreed not to list for trading on its board, securities already listed in the Manila Stock Exchange. Objecting to the requirement, Makati Stock Exchange, Inc. Contends that the Commission has no power to impose it and that anyway, it is illegal, discriminatory and unjust. The Commissions order or resolution would make impossible, for all practical purposes, for the Makati Stock Exchange to operate, such that its permission amounted to prohibition.

    Issue:
    Does the Commission have the authority to promulgate the rule in question?

    Held:
    None. 1. Test for determining the existence of authority The commission cites no provision of law expressly supporting its rule against double listing. It suggests that the power is necessary for the execution of the functions vested in it. It argues that said rule was approved by the Department Head before the war and it is not in conflict with the provisions of the Securities Act. The approval of the Department, by itself, adds no weight in judicial litigation. The test is not whether the Act forbids Commission from imposing a prohibition but whether it empowers the Commission to prohibit. 2. Commission without power to impose prohibition The Commission possesses no power to impose the condition of the rule which results in discrimination and violation of constitutional rights. It is fundamental that an administrative officer has such powers as are expressly granted to him by statute, and those necessarily implied in the exercise thereof. Accordingly, the license of Makati Stock Exchange is approved without such condition against double listing.

    KILUSANG BAYAN, ETC V. DOMINGUEZ Facts:

    SENATOR ROBERT JAWORSKI V. PAGCOR Facts:

    You might also like