G.R. No. 202331 - THE PROVINCIAL GOVERNMENT OF AURORA, VS. HILARIO M. MARCO.D E C I S I O N - Supreme Court E-Library

Ruling

WHEREFORE, the Motion for Reconsideration with Motion to Quash of Alex N. Ocampo, Provincial Administrator, and Manuel Joseph R. Bretana III, Legal Counsel, Provincial Government of Aurora, is DENIED . Accordingly, [the July 6, 2010 Resolution] which grants the Motion for the Implementation of [the April 14, 2008 Resolution] filed by Hilario M. Marco, STANDS . The Provincial Governor of Aurora is directed to reinstate Marco to his Cooperative Development Specialist II position and pay his back salaries and other benefits from the time that Marco was actually prohibited from reporting for work up to his actual reinstatement. [45] A Petition for Review [46] under Rule 43 with prayer for issuance of a temporary restraining order [47] was filed before the Court of Appeals. For the first time, the Province argued that Marco was a midnight appointee since Governor Ong appointed him during the last five (5) days of her tenure. Therefore, Marco's appointment was void. [48] In the Decision dated March 2, 2012, the Court of Appeals denied the Petition for Review and affirmed the implementation of the Civil Service Commission's April 14, 2008 Resolution. [49] The Court of Appeals ruled that the April 14, 2008 Resolution already became final and executory since there was no motion for reconsideration filed within the reglementary period. Although the Province filed a Petition for Relief before the Civil Service Commission, the Court of Appeals held that the remedy of a petition for relief is not allowed under the Uniform Rules on Administrative Cases in the Civil Service. Moreover, the Province failed to prove the extrinsic fraud that allegedly prevented it from filing a motion for reconsideration. Thus, the Civil Service Commission correctly denied the Petition for Relief. [50] On the merits, the Court of Appeals affirmed Marco's appointment. The Province had earlier certified that it had funds to pay for his salary as Cooperative Development Specialist II. [51] It found that the Sangguniang Panlalawigan even passed a "Supplemental Budget for 2004 appropriating P54,014,127.01 in provincial funds." [52] Therefore, the issuance of the Letter recalling the certification "[did] not change the fact that there [were] funds available for [Marco's] appointment." [53] On the claim that Marco was a midnight appointee, the Court of Appeals said that Marco's case fell within the exception provided under Civil Service Commission Resolution No. 030918. [54] He was fully qualified for the position and underwent a screening process on February 12 and 13, 2004, long before the election ban. [55] Therefore, he was validly appointed. The Province filed a Motion for Reconsideration, [56] which the Court of Appeals denied in the Resolution [57] dated June 13, 2012. The Province filed a Petition for Review on Certiorari before this court. Marco filed his Comment, [58] after which the Province filed its Reply. [59] In the Resolution [60] dated January 30, 2013, this court ordered