Back to Search
JurisprudenceG.R. No. 180941 -

G.R. No. 180941 - CHAIRMAN PERCIVAL C. CHAVEZ, CHAIR AND CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, PRESIDENTIAL COMMISSION FOR THE URBAN POOR (PCUP), VS. LOURDES R. RONIDEL AND HONORABLE COURT OF APPEALS, NINTH DIVISION.D E C I S I O N - Supreme Court E-Library

En Banc

Cited Laws

RA 773RA 507,RA 452,RA 695,RA 403,
Share:

TL;DR — Ruling

WHEREFORE, we find the Appeal meritorious. Ronidel's appointment as Development Management Officer V of PCUP is deemed valid and she is, therefore, allowed to assume the duties of said position. SO ORDERED.

Decision

Ruling

Accordingly, she, together with another applicant, Alicia S. Diaz (Diaz), were declared fit for promotion. [5] Thus, on June 1, 2000 and February 23, 2001, then PCUP Chairperson Atty. Donna Z. Gasgonia (Gasgonia) issued promotional appointments in favor of Diaz and respondent, respectively, to the two DMO V positions. Respondent took her oath and assumed her new position on the date of her appointment. [6] Meanwhile, on February 19, 2001, petitioner Percival C. Chavez was appointed as the new Chairperson and Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of PCUP, succeeding Gasgonia. However, petitioner took his oath and assumed office only on February 26, 2001. [7] On March 9, 2001, petitioner issued a Memorandum [8] to Ms. Susan Gapac (Gapac) of the PCUP Human Resources Department (HRD) instructing her to stop the processing of respondent's appointment papers until such time that an assessment thereon would be officially released by the office of petitioner. Petitioner, in effect, sought to recall and invalidate respondent's appointment on the following grounds: That respondent did not meet the "experience" requirement for the contested position; That the authority of Gasgonia as PCUP Chairman ceased when the president appointed petitioner to the post on February 19, 2001; That respondent's appointment as DMO V was a midnight appointment, hence, prohibited; That respondent's appointment was not effective since it was not in accordance with pertinent laws and rules; and Notwithstanding the initial approval of respondent's appointment, the same can be recalled for non-compliance with the criteria provided by PCUP's promotion plan. [9] Aggrieved by petitioner's inaction on her appointment, respondent appealed to the Civil Service Commission (CSC), National Capital Region (NCR). On January 17, 2003, the CSC-NCR issued an Order [10] in favor of respondent, the pertinent portion of which reads: WHEREFORE, we find the Appeal meritorious. Ronidel's appointment as Development Management Officer V of PCUP is deemed valid and she is, therefore, allowed to assume the duties of said position. SO ORDERED.