Atienza v.

Villarosa | ema
May 10, 2005
RAMON M. ATIENZA, in his capacity as VICE-GOVERNOR OF THE PROVINCE OF
OCCIDENTAL MINDORO, petitioner, vs.
JOSE T. VILLAROSA, in his capacity as GOVERNOR OF THE PROVINCE OF
OCCIDENTAL MINDORO, respondent.
Callejo, Sr., J.:

SUMMARY: Mindoro Occ. Governor Villarosa issued a memo requiring that all purchase orders
for supplies, equipment, etc. for the upkeep of the Sangguniang Panlalawigan be signed by him.
Vice Governor Atienza replied that such authority was vested in him by the LGC. In response,
Villarosa ordered the dismissal of almost 60 of Atienzas appointees in the provincial
government. Atienza asked Villarosa to reconsider both of his actions, but Villarosa refused.
Atienza thus filed a prohibition suit in the CA. CA dismissed the case and upheld Villarosas
power to sign the purchase orders, while ruling that the dismissal of the Atienza appointees can
no longer be stopped, as Villarosas order had already been implemented. Atienza appealed to
the SC, which ruled in his favor. SC held that under the LGC, the Vice Governor was given the
authority to sign warrants against the provincial treasury for all expenditures appropriated for the
operation of the SP. He was also designated as the Presiding Officer of the SP. As such, it is the
Vice Governor who has the authority to sign the purchase orders, pursuant to the specific
mandate of LGC 344 that vouchers and payrolls shall be approved by the head of the
department or office who has administrative control over the fund concerned; and it is the Vice
Governor who has such control with respect to the SP. Applying the doctrine of necessary
implication, SC held that the authority to sign vouchers and warrants necessarily includes the
authority to sign purchase orders, since the vouchers serve as bases for the purchase orders.
Regarding the dismissal of Atienzas appointees, SC held that the Vice Governor has the sole
power and authority to appoint officials and employees of the SP and the Vice Governors Office
who are paid from SP funds. Employees paid from provincial funds are under the appointing
power of the Governor. While the budget source of the dismissed employees salaries was not
known, SC still invalidated Villarosas memo ordering their dismissal, because it encroached
upon the appointing power of Vice Governor Atienza by relegating him to a mere
recommendatory role. SC held that the intent of the 1991 LGC was to separate the legislative
and the executive at the LGU level, by making the vice-governor presiding officer of the SP, and
vesting him with authority to appoint its officials and disburse its monies.

DOCTRINE: While RA 7160 is silent as to the matter, the authority granted to the Vice Governor
to sign all warrants drawn on the provincial treasury for all expenditures appropriated for the
operation of the Sangguniang Panlalawigan as well as to approve disbursement vouchers
relating thereto is greater and includes the authority to approve purchase orders for the
procurement of the supplies, materials and equipment necessary for the operation of the
Sangguniang Panlalawigan.
The Vice Governors authority to appoint the officials and employees of the SP is based on the
fact that the salaries of SP employees are derived from the SPs appropriation. The budget
source of their salaries is what sets apart SP officials and employees from other provincial
employees and officials.
The appointing power of the Vice Governor is thus limited to employees of the SP and the Office
of the Vice Governor whose salaries are paid out of the SPs appropriated funds. An employee
who is detailed or assigned in the Office of the Vice Governor but is paid out of provincial funds
is still within the Governors appointing authority.
With RA 7160, the union of legislative and executive powers in the office of the local chief
executive under the 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
delivery of public service and provide a system of check and balance between the two. The
avowed intent of RA 7160 is to vest the Sangguniang Panlalawigan with independence in the
exercise of its legislative functions vis-a-vis the discharge by the Governor of the executive
functions.

NATURE: Petition for review on certiorari. Original action for prohibition

FACTS:
June 25, 2002 Occidental Mindoro Governor Jose VILLAROSA issued a memorandum
concerning the authority to sign purchase orders of supplies, materials, equipment, and
repairs needed by the Sangguniang Panlalawigan. The memo stated that all such
purchase orders must be signed by the Governor, citing as basis DILG Opinion 148, s.
1993.
Occidental Mindoro Vice Governor Ramon ATIENZA responded that such authority
properly pertains to him as Vice Governor, citing as bases DILG Opinion 96, s. 1995, as
affirmed by COA Opinions of Jun. 28, Apr. 11, and Feb. 9, 1994. He also cited LGC 466
and 468 as bases for the separation of the legislative and executive powers at the
provincial level.
July 1, 2002 Villarosa responded by issuing a memorandum terminating the casual
and job order employees recommended or hired by Atienza. These employees included
28 plus clerks, 30 utility workers, and an x-ray technician. Villarosa claims that the
employees were redundant and that they bloated the bureaucracy.
July 3, 2002 Villarosa issued a memorandum reiterating the June 25 and July 3
memos and enjoining strict compliance therewith.
July 9, 2002 In a letter to Villarosa, Atienza raised his objections to the 2 memoranda,
invoking the separation of powers at a provincial level, where the legislature is headed
by the Vice Governor and the executive is headed by the Governor.
o Villarosa insisted on the implementation of the 2 memoranda.
Atienza thus filed a petition for prohibition before the CA, assailing the 2 memoranda as
having been issued with grave abuse of discretion. Atienza claimed that the memoranda
excluded him from the use and enjoyment of his office in violation of the pertinent
provision of the LGC. He prayed that Villarosa be enjoined from implementing the 2
memoranda.
Nov. 28, 2003 CA DECISION
o dismissed the petition.
o Under LGC 344, the governor has authority to approve the purchase orders on
question, since the provision states in part that "approval of the disbursement
voucher by the local chief executive himself shall be required whenever local
funds are disbursed."
o LGC 466(a)(1) relied upon by Atienza is inapplicable because the approval of
purchase orders is different from the power of the Vice Governor in 466(a)(1) to
sign warrants drawn against the public treasury.
o LGC 361 on requisitioning was also held inapplicable, thus: [R]equisitioning x x x
is the act of requiring that something be furnished. In the procurement function, it
is the submission of written requests for supplies and materials and the like. It
could be inferred that, in the scheme of things, approval of purchase requests is
different from approval of purchase orders.
o CA ruled that the question on the validity of the dismissal of the vice governors
employees was moot, as the act could no longer be enjoined.
 Atienza filed the present petition with the SC.
Atienza and Villarosas terms have expired on June 30, 2004. Atienza did not seek re-
election, while Villarosa lost his re-election bid, so the case has become moot. SC
revolved to rule on the merits to formulate controlling principles to guide the bench, the
bar, and the public.

ISSUES (HELD)
1) Who between the governor and the vice governor is authorized to approve purchase orders
issued in connection with the procurement of supplies, materials, equipment, including fuel,
repairs and maintenance of the Sangguniang Panlalawigan (VICE GOVERNOR)
2) W/N the governor has the authority to terminate or cancel the appointments of casual/job
order employees of the Sangguniang Panlalawigan Members and the Office of the Vice
Governor (NO)

RATIO
MANDATE OF LGC & PRINCIPLES OF DECENTRALIZATION
LGC was enacted to implement the constitutional mandate to provide for a more
responsive and accountable local government structure instituted through a system of
decentralization with effective mechanism of recall, initiative and referendum, allocate
among the different local government units their powers, responsibilities, and resources,
and provide for the qualifications, election, appointment and removal, term, salaries,
powers and functions and duties of local officials, and all matters relating to the
organization and operation of the local units.
The provisions of the LGC are anchored on the following principles of decentralization:
o Effective allocation among the different local government units of their respective
powers, functions, responsibilities, and resources;
o Establishment in every LGU of an accountable, efficient, and dynamic
organizational structure and operating mechanism that will meet the priority
needs and service requirements of its communities
o Provinces with respect to component cities and municipalities, and cities and
municipalities with respect to component barangays, shall ensure that the acts of
their component units are within the scope of their prescribed powers and
functions
o Strengthening of effective mechanisms for ensuring the accountability of local
government units to their respective constituents in order to upgrade continually
the quality of local leadership
1) AUTHORITY TO APPROVE PURCHASE ORDERS FOR PROCUREMENT OF SUPPLIES,
MATERIALS, etc. OF SANGGUNIANG PANLALAWIGAN IS VESTED IN THE VICE
GOVERNOR
Under the LGC, local legislative power at the provincial level is exercised by the
Sangguniang Panlalawigan (SP) and the Vice Governor is its Presiding Officer.
o The SP enacts ordinances and resolutions, and appropriates funds for the
general welfare of the province in accordance with the LGC.
LGC 466(a)(1) provides that the Vice Governor shall be the presiding officer of the
sangguniang panlalawigan and can sign all warrants drawn on the provincial treasury for
all expenditures appropriated for the operation of the sangguniang panlalawigan
ANALYSIS OF LGC 344
LGC 344 provides: Certification on, and Approval of, Vouchers. No money shall be
disbursed unless the local budget officer certifies to the existence of appropriation that
has been legally made for the purpose, the local accountant has obligated said
 appropriation, and the local treasurer 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 control of the fund concerned, as to validity, propriety
and legality of the claim involved. 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 are disbursed.
In cases of special or trust funds, disbursements shall be approved by the administrator
of the fund.
In case of temporary absence or incapacity of the department head or chief of office, the
officer next in rank shall automatically perform his function and he shall be fully
responsible therefor.
CAs reliance on the approval of the disbursement voucher by the local chief
executive clause is misplaced.
This clause cannot prevail over the more specific clause which provides that Vouchers
and payrolls shall be certified to and approved by the head of the department or office
who has administrative control of the fund concerned, as to validity, propriety and legality
of the claim involved.
As presiding officer of the SP, it is the Vice Governor which has administrative control
over its funds. Accordingly, the authority to approve disbursement vouchers for
expenditures appropriated for the operation of the SP rests with the Vice Governor.
39 of COAs New Manual on the Government Accounting System for LGUs even
provides: x x x Disbursement vouchers for expenditures appropriated for the operation of
the Sanggunian shall be approved by the provincial Vice Governor, the city Vice Mayor
or the municipal Vice Mayor, as the case may be.
VICE GOVERNORS AUTHORITY TO SIGN WARRANTS & APPROVE DISURSEMENT
VOUCHERS NECESSARILY INCLUDES AUTHORITY TO APPROVE PURCHASE ORDERS
COVERING SUCH VOUCHERS
While the LGC is silent on the matter, the authority granted to the Vice Governor to sign
warrants and approve disbursement vouchers relating thereto includes the authority to
approve purchase orders covering such vouchers, applying the doctrine of necessary
implication.
o Chua v. CSC: Every statute is understood, by implication, to contain all such
provisions as may be necessary to effectuate its object and purpose, or to make
effective rights, powers, or privileges or jurisdiction which it grants, including all
such collateral and subsidiary consequences as may be fairly and logically
inferred from its terms. Ex necessitate legis.
Warrant an order directing the treasurer of the municipality to pay money out of funds
in city treasury which are or may become available for purpose specified to designated
persons (Protest of St. Louis-San Francisco Ry. Co.).
o Warrants of a municipal corporation are generally orders payable when funds are
found. They are issued for the payment of general municipal debts and expenses
subject to the rule that they shall be paid in the order of presentation (Shelley v.
St. Charles County Court).
Voucher - a document which shows that services have been performed or expenses
incurred. It covers any acquittance or receipt discharging the person or evidencing
payment by him. When used in connection with disbursement of money, it implies some
instrument that shows on what account or by what authority a particular payment has
 been made, or that services have been performed which entitle the party to whom it is
issued to payment (First National Bank of Chicago v. City of Elgin).
Purchase order - an authorization by the issuing party for the recipient to provide
materials or services for which issuing party agrees to pay; it is an offer to buy which
becomes binding when those things ordered have been provided (Smyth Worldwide
Movers v. Little Rock Packing).
o Contains the terms and conditions for the procurement of supplies, materials or
equipment, in particular.
o The tenor of a purchase order basically directs the supplier to deliver the articles
enumerated and subject to the terms and conditions specified therein.
When an authorized person approves a disbursement voucher, he certifies to the
correctness of the entries therein; that the expenses were necessary and lawful, and that
the supporting documents are complete and cash is available therefor. The person who
performed the service or delivered the goods becomes entitled to payment.
Thus, the express authority to approve disbursement vouchers in effect is also an
authority to approve the payment of money claims for supplies, materials and
equipment; and from this authority, the authority to approve purchase orders to cause
the delivery of the supplies, materials, and equipment is necessarily implied.
[T]he authority granted to the Vice Governor to sign all warrants drawn on the provincial
treasury for all expenditures appropriated for the operation of the Sangguniang
Panlalawigan as well as to approve disbursement vouchers relating thereto is greater
and includes the authority to approve purchase orders for the procurement of the
supplies, materials and equipment necessary for the operation of the Sangguniang
Panlalawigan.
2) GOVERNOR HAS NO AUTHORITY TO TERMINATE OR CANCEL THE APPOINTMENT OF
CASUAL OR JOB ORDER EMPLOYEES OF THE SP OR THE VICE GOVERNOR; INTENT OF
LGC ON SEPARATION OF POWERS
Concerning the appointing power of the Governor, LGC 465(b)(v) provides: For efficient,
effective and economical governance the purpose of which is the general welfare of the
province and its inhabitants pursuant to Section 16 of this Code, the provincial governor
shall appoint all officials and employees whose salaries and wages are wholly or mainly
paid out of provincial funds and whose appointments are not otherwise provided for in
this Code, as well as those he may be authorized by law to appoint.
As for the Vice Governor, LGC 466(2) provides: Subject to civil service law, rules and
regulations, appoint all officials and employees of the sangguniang panlalawigan, except
those whose manner of appointment is specifically provided in this Code.
Therefore, the appointing power of the Governor does not extend to officials and
employees of the Sangguniang Panlalawigan because the authority to appoint them is
vested in the Vice Governor. This includes casual and job order employees.
The Vice Governors authority to appoint the officials and employees of the SP is based
on the fact that the salaries of SP employees are derived from the SPs appropriation.
The budget source of their salaries is what sets apart SP officials and employees from
other provincial employees and officials.
The appointing power of the Vice Governor is thus limited to employees of the SP and
the Office of the Vice Governor whose salaries are paid out of the SPs appropriated
funds. An employee who is detailed or assigned in the Office of the Vice Governor but is
paid out of provincial funds is still within the Governors appointing authority.
CAB: The source of the appointees salaries is unclear. Nonetheless, the July 1 memo
cannot be upheld because it absolutely prohibited Atienza from exercising his authority
 to appoint SP employees, limiting him to a recommendatory role. This is an
encroachment on the Vice Governors appointing power.
It must be noted that RA 7160 altered the balance of powers at the LGU level. Under BP
337 the governor was also presiding officer of the SP, in effect uniting executive and
legislative powers in the governor. RA 7160, dissolved this union and separated the
legislative from the executive. According to Sen. Pimentel, this was the intent behind
making the Vice Governor and the Vice Mayor the presiding officers of their respective
Sanggunian.
The idea is to distribute powers among elective local officials so that the legislative,
which is the Sanggunian, can properly check the executive, which is the Governor or the
Mayor and vice versa and exercise their functions without any undue interference from
one by the other. The avowed intent of RA 7160, therefore, is to vest on the
Sangguniang Panlalawigan independence in the exercise of its legislative functions vis-
a-vis the discharge by the Governor of the executive functions.
The 2 memoranda issued by Villarosa constituted undue interference with the SPs
functions. They therefore run counter to the intent of the LGC and their implementation
must be permanently enjoined.

DISPOSITION: Petition granted. Memoranda dated June 25, 2002 and July 1, 2002 issued by
Villarosa are NULL AND VOID.