Atienza vs Villarosa Gov.

Villarosa issued yet another Memo for the enforcement of the 2

G.R. No. 161081 / May 10, 2005 / Callejo, Sr., J./ Locgov Local Fiscal Administration prior Memoranda. Vice-Gov. Atienza asked Gov. Villarosa to reconsider
NATURE Petition for review on certiorari and to make a deeper study, but it was unheeded so Vice-Gov
PETITIONERS Ramon M. Atienza, in his capacity as Vice-Governor of Atienza filed a petition for prohibition on the implementation of the 2
the Province of Occidental Mindoro Memoranda, assailing GAD on the part of the Gov.
RESPONDENTS Jose T. Villarosa, in his capacity as Governor of the CA: ruled in favor of the Gov
Province of Occidental Mindoro [MEMO 1]: Sec.344 LGC2: approval of the disbursement voucher by
the local chief executive himself shall be required whenever local funds
SUMMARY. Gov. Villarosa passed 2 contentious Memoranda: (1) making are disbursed. Also, Sec.466(a)(1) relied upon by Vice-Gov. Atienza
all POs of the SPn subject to the Govs approval and (2) terminating all is N/A because it speaks of a warrant, not POs. Finally, Sec.361 is N/A
employees of the SPn who were appointed by the Vice-Gov. SC held that because it refers to purchase requests (PRs), again, not the same as
due to decentralization, the powers reside with the Vice-Gov. His signing POs.
authority over POs of the SPn is evidenced by Sec.344 and 466(a)(1) by [MEMO 2]: moot & academic because the termination had already
doctrine of necessary implication, while his appointing authority over SPn been effected.
employees is under Sec.466(a)(2). The intent behind the change from the
BP 337 regime to the LGC of 1991 regime is the separation of powers Before resolving the issues, SC noted that both Gov. Villarosa and Vice-Gov.
between executive and legislative, which includes the concepts of checks Atienza already ceased to be the Gov and Vice-Gov because newly-elected
& balances and independence of the legislative. officials have already taken their oaths of office. But SC will decide this
DOCTRINE. With R.A. No. 7160, the union of legislative and executive case anyway to guide the bench, the bar and the public.
powers in the office of the local chief executive under BP 337 has been
disbanded, so that either department now comprises different and non
intermingling official personalities with the end in view of ensuring a better ISSUES & RATIO.
delivery of public service and provide a system of check and balance 1.[MEMO 1] Who between the Gov and Vice-Gov is authorized to approve
between the two The avowed intent of R.A. No. 7160 is to vest on the purchase orders issued in connection with the procurement of supplies,
Sangguniang Panlalawigan independence in the exercise of its legislative materials, equipment, including fuel, repairs and maintenance of the
functions vis vis the discharge by the Governor of the executive SPn? VICE-GOVERNOR
functions. P: 2 legal bases: (1) DILG Opinion No. 96-1995, as affirmed by the
COA, POs by the SPn need not be coursed through the Governor; and
FACTS. (2) Secs.466 & 468 LGC provide for the separation of powers between
Gov. Villarosa promulgated 2 contentious Memoranda: executive and legislative.
[MEMO 1]: all Purchase Orders (POs) issued in connection with the R: Last clause of Sec.344: the approval of the disbursement by the
procurement of supplies, materials and equipment of the Sangguniang local chief executive is required whenever local funds are disbursed.
Panlalawigan (SPn) shall be approved by the Gov as the local chief SC:
executive 2nd sentence of Sec.344 is the applicable provision: Vouchers and
Basis: DILG Opinion No. 148-1993 the payrolls shall be certified to and approved by the head of the
authority to sign POs of supplies, materials and department or office who has administrative control of the fund
equipment of the Sanggunian belongs to the local concerned[.] Since the Vice-Gov is the presiding officer of the SPn, he
chief executive has the administrative control of the funds of SPn and should have the
[MEMO 2]: termination of all existing contract of employment authority to approve POs, not the Gov. Contrary to CAs interpretation,
casual/ job-order basis entered into by Vice-Gov Atienza for being
unauthorized
To accommodate the Vice-Gov and the members of 2 Sec. 344. Certification on, and Approval of, Vouchers. No money shall be disbursed unless
the SPn, the Gov will allow 4 casual/job-order the local budget officer certifies to the existence of appropriation that has been legally made for
employees for the Vice-Gov and 1 for each member the purpose, the local accountant has obligated said appropriation, and the local treasurer
of the SPn. They were then directed to submit the certifies to the availability of funds for the purpose. Vouchers and payrolls shall be certified
to and approved by the head of the department or office who has administrative
names of their recommendees1, subject to the control of the fund concerned, as to validity, propriety and legality of the claim involved.
Govs approval. Except in cases of disbursements involving regularly recurring administrative expenses such as
payrolls for regular or permanent employees, expenses for light, water, telephone and telegraph
services, remittances to government creditor agencies such as the GSIS, SSS, LBP, DBP, National
Printing Office, Procurement Service of the DBM and others, approval of the disbursement
voucher by the local chief executive himself shall be required whenever local funds
1 No such word in the dictionary, but the Memo used this word are disbursed.
 the last clause cannot prevail over the more specific clause found in Under Sec.465(b)(v) LGC, the Gov has the broad power to appoint all
the 2nd sentence of Sec.344. officials and employees whose salaries and wages are wholly or mainly
Sec.39 of the Manual on New Govt Accounting System for paid out of provincial funds. However, under Sec.466(a)(2), Vice-Gov
LGUs, prepared by COA, disbursement vouchers for expenditures has the specific authority to appoint all officials and employees of the
appropriated for the operation of the SPn shall be approved by the SPn.
Vice-Gov. Why the diff?
Doctrine of necessary implication: While the LGC is silent as to the The reason for the distinction between the Govs and the Vice-Govs
approving authority for POs, it may be said that the authority of the power to appoint is because in the latter, the salaries of these
Vice-Gov to sign all warrants drawn on the provincial treasury for all employees are derived from the appropriation specifically for the SPn,
expenditures appropriated for the operation of the SPn,3 as well as to while in the former, their salaries are paid out of the Provincial funds.
approve disbursement vouchers4 relating thereto necessarily includes As applied, while it does not appear whether the salaries of the
the authority to approve POs covering the same. employees subject of controversy will be paid out of the Provincial
DEFINITIONS: funds or SPn funds, still, Memo 2 cannot be upheld because it is a clear
Warrant: an order directing the treasurer of the municipality to pay encroachment of Sec.466(a)(2).
money out of funds in city treasury which are or may become available Intent of the law LGC of 1991
for purpose specified to designated persons Under BP 337, the Gov was the presiding officer of the SPn. However,
Voucher: a document which shows that services have been performed with the enactment of the LGC of 1991, citing Pimentel, the idea of
or expenses incurred making the Vice-Gov as the presiding officer of the SPn is to distribute
PO: authorization by the issuing party for the recipient to provide powers among elective local officials so that the legislative, which is
materials or services for which issuing party agrees to pay; it is an offer the Sanggunian, can properly check the executive, which is the
to buy which becomes binding when those things ordered have been Governor or the Mayor and vice versa and exercise their functions
provided without any undue interference from one by the other.
JUSTIFICATION OF THE APPLICATION OF DOCTRINE: The avowed intent of LGC is to vest on the SPn independence in the
When an authorized person approves a disbursement voucher, he exercise of its legislative functions vis-a-vis the discharge by the Gov of
certifies to the correctness of the entries, e.g. that the expenses the executive functions.
incurred were necessary and lawful, the supporting documents are As applied, the Memo 2 constituted undue interference with the Vice-
complete and the availability of cash therefor. Further, the person who Govs functions.
performed the services or delivered the supplies, materials or
equipment is entitled to payment. DECISION.
On the other hand, the terms and conditions for the procurement of Petition granted.
supplies, materials or equipment, in particular, are contained in a PO.
The tenor of a PO basically directs the supplier to deliver the articles
enumerated and subject to the terms and conditions specified therein.
Hence, the express authority to approve disbursement vouchers and,
in effect, authorize the payment of money claims for supplies,
materials or equipment, necessarily includes the authority to approve
POs to cause the delivery of the said supplies, materials or equipment.

Bottomline: the authority sign warrants and approve disbursement

vouchers are greater and necessarily includes the authority to approve
POs for the operation of SPn.

2. [MEMO 2] Does Gov. Villarosa, as local chief executive, have the

authority to terminate or cancel the appointments of casual/job order
employees of the SPn Members and the Office of the Vice-Gov? NO.
General v. Specific

3 Vice-Govs authority to sign warrants found in Sec.466(a)(1) LGC

4 Vice-Govs authority to approve disbursement vouchers found in Sec.344 LGC