Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 2K views

    Rabor v. CSC

    Uploaded by

    Raymond Roque
    Dionisio Rabor was a utility worker who was advised to retire at 68 years old since he had not yet completed the 15-year requirement. Rabor requested an extension until he reached the 15-year mark but this was denied based on an OP memo and CSC circular limiting extensions past 65. Rabor argued his case based on the Cena doctrine which allowed extensions but the Court overturned the Cena doctrine, finding that both the Administrative Code and PD 1146 should be considered together. The Administrative Code grants the CSC power to promulgate policies on retirement like the circular limiting extensions past 65. Therefore, Rabor's request for extension was denied.

    Copyright:

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

    Rabor v. CSC

    Uploaded by

    Raymond Roque
    2K views2 pages
    Dionisio Rabor was a utility worker who was advised to retire at 68 years old since he had not yet completed the 15-year requirement. Rabor requested an extension until he reached the 15-year mark but this was denied based on an OP memo and CSC circular limiting extensions past 65. Rabor argued his case based on the Cena doctrine which allowed extensions but the Court overturned the Cena doctrine, finding that both the Administrative Code and PD 1146 should be considered together. The Administrative Code grants the CSC power to promulgate policies on retirement like the circular limiting extensions past 65. Therefore, Rabor's request for extension was denied.

    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?

    Dionisio Rabor was a utility worker who was advised to retire at 68 years old since he had not yet completed the 15-year requirement. Rabor requested an extension until he reached the 15-year mark but this was denied based on an OP memo and CSC circular limiting extensions past 65. Rabor argued his case based on the Cena doctrine which allowed extensions but the Court overturned the Cena doctrine, finding that both the Administrative Code and PD 1146 should be considered together. The Administrative Code grants the CSC power to promulgate policies on retirement like the circular limiting extensions past 65. Therefore, Rabor's request for extension was denied.

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    2K views2 pages

    Rabor v. CSC

    Uploaded by

    Raymond Roque
    Dionisio Rabor was a utility worker who was advised to retire at 68 years old since he had not yet completed the 15-year requirement. Rabor requested an extension until he reached the 15-year mark but this was denied based on an OP memo and CSC circular limiting extensions past 65. Rabor argued his case based on the Cena doctrine which allowed extensions but the Court overturned the Cena doctrine, finding that both the Administrative Code and PD 1146 should be considered together. The Administrative Code grants the CSC power to promulgate policies on retirement like the circular limiting extensions past 65. Therefore, Rabor's request for extension was denied.

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 2

    Rabor v.

    CSC

    Facts:
    Dionisio M. Rabor is a Utility Worker in the Office of the Mayor, Davao City. He
    entered the government service as a Utility Worker on 10 April 1978 at the age of
    55 years. Sometime in May 1991, an official in the Office of the Mayor of Davao
    City, advised Dionisio M. Rabor to apply for retirement, considering that he had
    already more than 68 years old. Rabor responded by showing a GSIS certificate with
    a notation to the effect that his service is extended for him to complete the 15-
    years requirement for retirement. The Davao City Government wrote to the
    Regional Director of the Civil Service Commission, Region XI, Davao City informing
    the latter of the foregoing and requesting advice as to what action should be taken
    on Rabor’s case. Director Caward replied by saying that Rabor’s continued
    employment is contrary to OP M.C. No. 65 hence, it is non-extendible. Mayor
    Duterte furnished Rabor a copy of Cawad’s letter and order him not to work
    anymore. Rabor asked Director Cawad for extension of his job until he completed
    the 15-year requirement but was denied. Rabor then asked OP for an extension. His
    request was referred by OP to CSC and thereafter CSC denied Rabor’s request.
    Rabor asked for reconsidered of CSC ruling citing Cena case but was denied. Rabor
    reiterated his request to Mayor Duterte but was rebuffed. Hence, this petition.

    Issue:
    WON Rabor request for extension should be granted in view of Cena case

    Held:
    No. Cena doctrine overturned. In Cena v. CSC, the Court reached its
    conclusion primarily on the basis of the "plain and ordinary meaning" of Section 11
    (b) of P.D. No. 1146. While Section 11 (b) appeared cast in verbally unqualified
    terms, there were (and still are) two (2) administrative issuances which prescribe
    limitations on the extension of service that may be granted to an employee who has
    reached sixty-five (65) years of age. These are CSC Circular No. 27, s. 1990 and OP
    M.C. No. 65. The Court resolved the challenges posed by the above two (2)
    administrative regulations by, firstly, considering as invalid Civil Service
    Memorandum No. 27 and, secondly, by interpreting the Office of the President's
    Memorandum Circular No. 65 as inapplicable to the case of Gaudencio T. Cena.
    Nevertheless, the Court now ruled that the SC in Cena made a narrow
    interpretation. It is incorrect to decide the issue on the basis only of PD 1146.
    Reading the pertinent provisions the Admin Code particularly the provisions
    governing the CSC, it is clear that both the Admin Code and PD 1146 are the
    governing laws relating to retirement of government officials and employees. It was
    on the basis of the above quoted provisions of the 1987 Administrative Code that
    the Civil Service Commission promulgated its Memorandum Circular No. 27. In doing
    so, the Commission was acting as "the central personnel agency of the government
    empowered to promulgate policies, standards and guidelines for efficient,
    responsive and effective personnel administration in the government." It was also
    discharging its function of "administering the retirement program for government
    officials and employees" and of "evaluat[ing] qualifications for retirement." It is
    also incorrect to say that limitation of permissible extensions of service after an
    employee has reached sixty-five (65) years of age has no reasonable relationship or
    is not germane to the foregoing provisions of the present Civil Service Law. The
    physiological and psychological processes associated with ageing in human beings
    are in fact related to the efficiency and quality of the service that may be expected
    from individual persons.
    CSC Memo No. 27 is not invalid for having gone beyond the parameters set
    by PD 1146. In fact what the legislature intends is that the CSC should “fill in the
    details” in the implementation of PD 1146.

    You might also like