Scribd
Upload
67 views7 pages

Alquizola Vs Ocol - SC Ruling

Uploaded by

Leudemer Labra
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
67 views7 pages

Alquizola Vs Ocol - SC Ruling

Uploaded by

Leudemer Labra
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 7

 Home

 Main Index
 Law Library
 Philippine Laws, Statutes & Codes

 Philippine Supreme Court Decisions

SUPREME COURT DECISIONS


Search for www.chanrobles.com

Alquizola vs Ocol : 132413 : August 27, 1999 : J.


Vitug : Third Division

PLEASE CLICK HERE FOR THE LATEST ➔ SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

Home > ChanRobles Virtual Law Library > Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence >


Syllabi/Synopsis

THIRD DIVISION

[G.R. No. 132413. August 27, 1999]

RAMON ALQUIZOLA, SR., MARISSA C. DOROMAL and ADELO


SECO, Petitioners, v. GALLARDO OCOL, CAMILO P. PENACO, SATURNINO
MENDOZA, RAFAEL R. ARDIENTE, VICENTE C. CASERES, RICARDO B.
ZOSA III and SIRAD M. UMPA, Respondents.

DECISION

VITUG, J.:

Before the Court is a petition for review on certiorari under Rule 45 of the Rules
of Court seeking a reversal of the decision, dated 19 November 1997, of the
Regional Trial Court of Lanao Del Norte, Branch 04, Iligan City, that has ordered
petitioner Ramon Alquizola, Sr., to cease and desist from dismissing respondents
and replacing them with his co-petitioners.

Petitioner Ramon Alquizola, Sr., won the post of Punong


Barangay of Barangay Tubod, Iligan City, in the 12th May 1997 barangay
elections. Respondents Gallardo Ocol, Camilo Penaco, Saturnino Mendoza, Rafael
Ardiente, Vicente Caseres, Ricardo Zosa III, and Sirad Umpa were appointees of
the former punong barangay of Barangay Tubod, the first two occupying the
positions of barangay treasurer and barangay secretary, respectively, with the
rest being barangay utility workers.

After the elections, petitioner Alquizola terminated the services of respondents


and appointed his co-petitioners, Marissa Doromal and Adelo Seco, respectively,
as barangay treasurer and as barangay secretary. In consonance with Section
394 and Section 395 of the Local Government Code, he submitted both
appointments to the Sangguniang Barangay for approval.
The Sanggunian rejected the appointments.

Following the action taken by the Sangguniang Barangay, respondents filed a


complaint for quo warranto, mandamus and prohibition with the Regional Trial
Court of Lanao Del Norte to enjoin petitioner from terminating the services of the
former. The trial court found in favor of respondents and ordered petitioner
Ramon Alquizola, Sr., to cease and desist from dismissing respondents on the
ground that their dismissal had been effected without the corresponding
approval of the Sangguniang Barangay. It held that Section 389(b)(5) limited
the power of a barangay captain to remove appointive barangay officials by
requiring an approval of such act by a majority of the Sangguniang Barangay. A
motion for reconsideration was denied.

The Court finds no merit in the instant petition for certiorari.

The issue involved, purely a question of law, relates to the proper application of
the following provisions of the Local Government Code; viz:

Section 389. Chief Executive: Powers, Duties, and Functions. x x x

(b) For efficient, effective and economical governance, the purpose of which is
the general welfare of the barangay and its inhabitants pursuant to Section 16 of
this Code, the punong barangay shall:

xxx

(5) Upon approval by a majority of all the members of the sangguniang


barangay, appoint or replace the barangay treasurer, the barangay secretary,
and other appointive barangay officials;

The term replace would obviously embrace not only the appointment of the


replacement but also the prior removal of, or the vacation by, the official
currently occupying the appointive position concerned. To replace is to take the
place of, to serve as a substitute for or successor of, to put in place of, or to fill
the post of an incumbent.1 In order to provide a replacement to an office, the
prior holder must have first been removed or the office must have, otherwise,
been previously rendered vacant.

Aside from what may be implicit in Section 389, there is no other provision in
the Local Government Code that treats of the power of the Punong Barangay to
remove the barangay secretary, the barangay treasurer, or any other
appointive barangay official from office. The duration of the term of office of
these barangay officials have not been fixed by the Local Government Code.
Where the tenure of the office is not fixed by law, it is a sound and useful rule to
consider the power of removal as being an incident to the power of
appointment.2 Elsewise stated, the power to remove is deemed implied in the
power to appoint.

The Code explicitly vests on the punong barangay, upon approval by a majority


of all the members of the sangguniang barangay, the power to appoint or
replace the barangay treasurer, the barangay secretary, and other
appointive barangay officials. This provision is reinforced, in the case of the
secretary and the treasurer, by the provisions of Section 394 and Section 395 of
the Local Government Code; to wit:

Section 394. Barangay Secretary: Appointment, Qualifications, Powers and


Duties. - (a) The barangay secretary shall be appointed by the punong barangay
with the concurrence of the majority of all the sangguniang barangay members.
The appointment of the barangay secretary shall not be subject to attestation by
the Civil Service Commission.

Section 395. Barangay Treasurer: Appointment, Qualifications, Powers and


Duties. - (a) The barangay treasurer shall be appointed by the punong barangay
with the concurrence of the majority of all the sangguniang barangay members.
The appointment of the barangay treasurer shall not be subject to attestation by
the Civil Service Commission.

Verily, the power of appointment is to be exercised conjointly by the punong


barangay an a majority of all the members of the sangguniang barangay.
Without such conjoint action, neither an appointment nor a replacement can be
effectual.

Applying the rule that the power to appoint includes the power to remove, one
that the Court finds no cogent reason to now depart from, the questioned
dismissal from office of the barangay officials by the punong barangay without
the concurrence of the majority of all the members of the Sangguniang
Barangay cannot be legally justified. To rule otherwise could also create an
absurd situation of the Sangguniang Barangay members refusing, like here, to
give their approval to the replacements selected by the punong barangay who
has unilaterally terminated the services of the incumbents. It is likely that the
legislature did not intend this absurdity to flow from its enactment of the law.
WHEREFORE, the instant petition is DENIED and the decision, dated 19
November 1997, of the Regional Trial Court of Lanao Del Norte is AFFIRMED. No
costs.

SO ORDERED.

Melo, (Chairman), Panganiban, Purisima, and Gonzaga-Reyes, JJ.,


concur.

Endnotes:

1
 See Websters Third New International Dictionary.

2
 MECHEM, A Treatise on the Law of Public Offices and Officers, 445, p. 284.

ChanRobles Professional Review, Inc.


ChanRobles On-Line Bar Review

ChanRobles CPA Review Online


ChanRobles Special Lecture Series

Copyright © 2005-06 - 2023 ReDiaz

You might also like

pFad - Phonifier reborn

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.

Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.


Alternative Proxies:

Alternative Proxy

pFad Proxy

pFad v3 Proxy

pFad v4 Proxy