054-Mita Pardo de Tavera vs. Tuberculosis Society 112 Scra 243

Mita Pardo de Tavera Tavera

GR. No. L-48928

1 of 7

Republic of the Philippines

SUPREME COURT Manila FIRST DIVISION

GR. No. L-48928 February 25, 1982 MIT PR!O !E T"ER, plaintiff-appellant, vs.

P#ILIPPINE TU$ERCULOSIS SOCIET%, INC., FRNCISCO ORTIGS, &R., MIGUEL C'I(RES, $ERNR!O P. PR!O, RLP# NU$L, MI!PNTO !IL, ENRI)UE GRCI, L$ERTO G. ROMULO a*+ T#E PRESENT $OR! OF !IRECTORS, P#ILIPPINE TU$ERCULOSIS SOCIET%, INC., defendants- appellees. GUERRERO, J.: On Mach !", #$%&, plaintiff-appellant Mita Pado de Tavea filed 'ith the (out of Fist Instance of Ri)al a co*pla co*plaint int a+ainst a+ainst the Philip Philippin pinee Tube Tubecul culosi osiss Societ Societ,, Inc. Inc. heei heeinaf nafte te efe efeed ed to as the Societ Societ, , Mi+uel Mi+uel (ani)aes, Ralph Nubla, /enado Pado, 0ni1ue 2acia, Midpantao 3dil, 3lbeto Ro*ulo, and the pesent /oad of Diectos of the Philippine Tubeculosis Societ, Societ, Inc. On 3pil #!, #$%&, plaintiff-appellant filed an a*ended co*plaint i*pleadin+ Fancisco Oti+as, 4. as pat defendant. In substance, the co*plaint alle+ed that plaintiff is a docto of Medicine b pofession and a eco+ni)ed specialist in the teat*ent of tubeculosis, havin+ been in the continuous pactice of he pofession since #$567 that she is a *e*be of the /oad of Diectos of the defendant Societ, in epesentation of the Philippine (hait S'eepsta8es Office7 that she 'as dul appointed on 3pil !%, #$%" as 09ecutive Seceta of the Societ7 that on Ma !$, #$%5, the past /oad of Diectos e*oved he su**ail fo* he position, the la'ful cause of 'hich she 'as not info*ed, thou+h the si*ple e9pedient of declain+ he position vacant7 that i**ediatel theeafte, defendant 3lbeto Ro*ulo 'as appointed to the position b an affi*ative vote of seven diectos, 'ith t'o abstentions and one ob:ection7 and that defendants Pado, Nubla, 2acia and 3dil, not bein+ *e*bes of defendant Societ 'hen the 'ee elevated to the position of *e*bes of the /oad of Diectos, ae not 1ualified to be elected as such and hence, all thei acts in said *eetin+ of Ma !$, #$%5 ae null and void. The defendants filed thei ans'e on Ma #!, #$%&, specificall denin+ that plaintiff 'as ille+all e*oved fo* he position as 09ecutive Seceta and avein+ that unde the (ode of /-;a's of the Societ, said position is held at the pleasue of the /oad of Diectos and 'hen the pleasue is e9ecised, it onl *eans that the incu*bent has to vacate the sa*e because he te* has e9pied7 that defendants Pado, Nubla, 3dil and 2acia 'ee, at the ti*e of thei election, *e*bes of the defendant Societ and 1ualified to be elected as *e*bes of the /oad, that assu*in+ that said defendants 'ee not *e*bes of defendant Societ at the ti*e of thei election, the 1uestion of 1ualification of the *e*bes of the /oad of Diectos should have been aised at the ti*e of thei election< that assu*in+ that the 1ualification of *e*bes of the /oad of Diectos can be 1uestioned afte thei assu*ption of thei offices as diectos, such contest cannot be done in a collateal action7 that an action to 1uestion the 1ualifications of the Diectos *ust be bou+ht 'ithin one ea fo* thei election7 and that a Diecto elected 'ithout 'ithout necessa necessa 1ualification 1ualification beco*es at least a de facto diecto, 'hose acts ae as valid and bindin+ as a de jure diecto. jure diecto. Futhe, defendant disputed the ti*eliness of the filin+ of the action statin+ that an action to 1uestion one=s ouste fo* a copoate office *ust be filed 'ithin one ea fo* said ouste.

Mita Pardo de Tavera

GR. No. L-48928

2 of 7

On the sa*e date, defendant 3dil filed a Motion to Dis*iss on the +ound that the co*plaint states no cause of action, o if it does, the sa*e has pescibed. Inas*uch as plaintiff see8s einstate*ent, he a+ued that the co*plaint is an action fo quo warranto and hence, the sa*e should be co**enced 'ithin one ea fo* Ma !$, #$%5 'hen the plaintiff 'as ousted fo* he position. Plaintiff filed an Opposition to Motion to Dis*iss on Ma !>, #$%&, statin+ that the co*plaint is a suit fo da*a+es filed unde the authoit of Section &, 3ticle ## of the pesent (onstitution in elation to 3ticles #! and "!& of the Ne' (ivil (ode, and he constitutional i+ht to e1ual potection of the la', as +uaanteed b Section #, 3ticle IV of the pesent (onstitution. On 4une !, #$%&, defendant 3dil filed a Repl to Plaintiff=s Opposition to Motion to Dis*iss a+uin+ that since thee is an ave*ent of plaintiff=s i+ht to office, and that defendant Ro*ulo is unla'full in possession theeof, thei it is indeed, a case fo quo warranto7 and that assu*in+ that it is *eel a suit fo da*a+es, then, the sa*e is pe*atue, pusuant to Section #&, Rule && of the Rules of (out. On Septe*be ", #$%&, the cotut a quo endeed a decision holdin+ that the pesent suit bein+ one fo quo warranto it should be filed 'ithin one ea fo* plaintiff=s oute fo* office7 that nevetheless, plaintiff 'as not ille+all endeed o used fo* he position as 09ecutive Seceta in The Societ since plaintiff as holdin+ an appoint*ent all the pleasue of the appointin+ po'e and hence he appoint*ent in essence 'as te*poa in natue, te*inable at a *o*ent=s notice 'ithout need to sho' that the te*ination 'as fo cause7 and (hat plaintiff=s ouste fo* office *a not be challen+ed on the +ound that the acts of defendants Pado, 3dil, Nubla and 2acia ae null and void, the bein+ not 1ualified to be elected *e*bes of the /oad of Diectos because the 1ualifications of the *e*bes of the /oad of Diectos 'hich e*oved plaintiff fo* office *a not be the sub:ect of a collateal attac8 in the pesent suit fo quo warranto affectin+ title to the office of 09ecutive Seceta. On Octobe #", #$%&, plaintiff filed a Motion fo Reconsideation to 'hich defendants filed an Opposition. On Nove*be !6, #$%&, the cout a quo denied the *otion fo Reconsideation. Dissatisfied 'ith the decision and the ode denin+ the *otion fo econsideation. plaintiff filed a Notice of 3ppeal and an ?+ent Motion fo 09tension of Ti*e to File Recod on 3ppeal, 'hich 'as +anted in an ode dated Dece*be #6, #$%&. @o'eve, on Dece*be !A, #$%&, the cout a 1uo issued an a*ended ode 'hee it 1ualified the action as pincipall one fo quo warranto and hence, dispensed 'ith the filin+ of a ecod on appeal as the oi+inal ecods of the case ae e1uied to be elevated to the (out of 3ppeals. On 3u+ust >, #$%>, the (out of 3ppeals issued a esolution cetifin+ this case to this (out considein+ that the appeal aises no factual issues and involves onl issues of la', as *a be +leaned fo* the follo'in+ assi+n*ents of eos< I. The lo'e cout eed in holdin+ that the pesent case is one fo 1uo 'aanto and not an action fo da*a+es. II. In decidin+ the case, the lo'e cout eed in not upholdin+ the Societ=s /-;a's, the applicable la's, and the petinent povisions of the (onstitution. III. The lo'e cout eed in holdin+ that the plaintiff-appellant is not in the civil sevice, and theefoe, not entitled to the +uaant a+ainst e*oval fo* office e9cept fo cau se and afte due pocess of la'. The natue of an action filed in cout is dete*ined b the facts alle+ed in the co*plaint as constitutin+ the cause of action, and not those aveed as a defense in the defendant=s ans'e. The theo adopted b the plaintiff in his co*plaint is one thin+7 that b the defendant in his ans'e anothe. The pupose of an action o suit and the la' to


GR. No. L-48928

3 of 7

+oven it, includin+ the peiod of pesciption, is to be dete*ined not b the clai* of the pat filin+ the action, *ade in his a+u*ent o bief, but athe b the co*plaint itself, its alle+ations and pae fo elief. Rone et al. vs. (lao, et al., ;-55%!, Ma >, #$6!, $# Phil. !6A. In Baguioro vs. Barrios, et al., %% Phil. #!A, the Supe*e (out held that if the elief de*anded is not the pope one 'hich *a be +anted unde the la', it does not chaactei)e o dete*ine the natue of plaintiff=s action, and the elief to 'hich plaintiff is entitled based on the facts alle+ed b hi* in his co*plaint, althou+h it is not the elief de*anded, is 'hat dete*ines the natue of the action. Bhile it is tue that the co*plaint 1uestions petitione=s e*oval fo* the position of 09ecu tive Seceta and see8s he einstate*ent theeto, the natue of the suit is not necessail one of quo warranto. The natue of the instant suit is one involvin+ a violation of the i+hts of the plaintiff unde the /-;a's of the Societ, the (ivil (ode and the (onstitution, 'hich alle+edl endes the individuals esponsible theefoe, accountable fo da*a+es, as *a be +leaned fo* the follo'in+ alle+ations in the co*plaint as constitutin+ the plaintiff=s causes of action, to 'it< !A. That, as a conse1uence of the unfai and *alicious e*oval of plaintiff fo* he office, 'hich the plaintiff *aintains to be conta to *oals, +ood custo*s, public polic, the petinent povisions of said /-;a's of the Societ, the la's, and the +uaanties of the (onstitution, b defendants (ani)aes, Oti+as 4., Pado, 3dil, Nubla and 2acia, the plaintiff suffeed not onl *ateial da*a+es, but seious da*a+e to he piceless popeties, consistin+ of he hono and eputation, 'hich 'ee *aliciousl and unla'full bes*iched, theeb entitlin+ he to co*pensation fo *ateial and *oal da*a+es, fo* said defendants, :ointl and seveall, unde 3ticle !#, in elation to 3ticle "!& of the Ne' (ivil (ode7 999 999 999 !5. That as a conse1uence of the inodinate use and abuse of po'e b defendants, (aaes Oti+as 4., Pado, 3dil, Nubla and 2acia, in abitail, ille+all, and un:ustl e*ovin+ the plaintiff fo* office, 'ithout due pocess of la', and in denin+ to he the en:o*ent of the +uaant of the (onstitution to e1ual potection of the la', the plaintiff suffeed *ateial and *oal da*a+es as a esult of the debase*ent of he di+nit, both as an individual and as a pofessional phsician of +ood standin+, theefoe, defendant (aaes Oti+as 4., Pado, 3dil, Nubla and 2acia should be odeed to pa he *oal da*a+es, :ointl and seveall7 999 999 999 !&. That the acts of the defendants (ani)aes, Oti+as 4., Pado, 3dil, Nubla and 2acia, in ille+all e*ovin+ the plaintiff fo* he position as 09ecutive Seceta of defendant Societ, 'hich plaintiff 'as then holdin+ unde a valid appoint*ent and theeafte, i**ediatel appointin+ defendant 3lbeto Ro*ulo to the position, is *ost unfai, un:ust and *alicious, because it is conta to +ood *oals, +ood custo*s, public polic, the petinent povisions of the (ode of /-;a's of the defendant Societ, the la's and the afoe*entioned +uaanties of the (onstitution7 that the plaintiff co*plaint that the said defendants ae le+all obli+ated to co*pensate he, in concept of e9e*pla da*a+es, in ode to estain pesons in authoit fo* co**ittin+ si*ila file I and un constitutional acts 'hich debase hu*an di+nit and inflict in:uies to thei fello'*en7 999 999 999 "#. That, as a conse1uence of the said un:ustified efusal of the defendant, pesent /oad of Diectos of the defendant Societ, to esolve the co*plaint of the plaintiff and e9tend to he the eliefs to 'hich she is entitled unde the la' and the (onstitution, it is espectfull sub*itted that


GR. No. L-48928

4 of 7

said defendant /oad is unde le+al obli+ation to coect the ille+al and unconstitutional act of defendants (aaes Oti+as 4., Pado, Nubla, 3dil and 2acia, b estoin+ the plaintiff to he position as 09ecutive Seceta of the defendant Societ, pa*ent of salaies and othe benefits, coespondin+ to the peiod of he ille+al and unconstitutional e*oval fo* office. Futhe, it *ust be noted that the action is not onl a+ainst 3lbeto Ro*ulo, the peson appointed in he stead, but also a+ainst the Societ and the past and pesent *e*bes of the /oad. In fact, Ro*ulo is sued as pesent occupant of the office and not to hold hi* accountable fo da*a+es because he did not paticipate in the alle+ed ille+al and unconstitutional e*oval of plaintiff- appellant. The action is pi*ail a+ainst the Societ and the past *e*bes of the /oad 'ho ae esponsible fo he e*oval. The pesent /oad of Diectos has been i*plead as pat defendant fo the pupose *eel of enablin+ it to act, Cto einstate the plaintiff to he position as 09ecutive Seceta of the defendant SocietC bein+ one of the eliefs paed fo in the pae of the co*plaint. @ence, Be hold that 'hee the espondents, e9cept fo one, na*el, 3lbeto Ro*ulo, ae not actuall holdin+ the office in 1uestion, the suit could not be one fo quo warranto. (oollail, the one-ea peiod fi9ed in Section #&, Rule && of the Revised Rules of (out 'ithin 'hich a petition fo quo warranto should be filed, counted fo* the date of ouste, does not appl to the case at ba. The action *ust be bou+ht 'ithin fou 5 eas, in accodance 'ith Valencia vs. Cebu Portland Cement Co., et al ., ;-#"%#6, Dece*be !", #$6$, #A& Phil. %"!, case involvin+ a plaintiff sepaated fo* his e*plo*ent fo alle+ed un:ustifiable causes, 'hee this (out held that the action n is one fo Cin:u to the i+hts of the plaintiff, and *ust be bou+ht 'ithin 5 eas *ude 3ticle ##5& of the Ne' (ivil (ode . Nonetheless, althou+h the action is not baed b the statute of li*itations, Be ule that it 'ill not pospe. (onta to he clai*, petitione 'as not ille+all e*oved o fo* he position as 09ecutive Seceta in violation of (ode of /-la's of the Societ. the Ne' (ivil (ode and the petinent povisions of the (o nstitution. Petitione clai*s and the espondents do not dispute that the 09ecutive Seceta is an office of the Societ pusuant to povision in the (ode of /-la's ;a's< Section %.A#. Officers of the Society.  The e9ecuted offices f the Societ sha+ be the Pesident a Vice-Pesident, a Teasue 'ho shall be elected b the /oad of Diectos, 09ecutive Seceta, and an 3udito, 'ho shall be appointed b the /oad of Diectos, all of 'ho* shall e9ecise the functions. po'es and peo+atives +eneall vested upon s8ich offices, the functions heeinafte set out fo thei espective offices and such othe duties is fo* ti*e to ti*e, *a be pescibed b the /oad of Diectos. On e peson *a hold *oe than one office e9cept 'hen the functions theeof ae inco*patible 'ith each othe. It is petitione=s contention that she is sub:ect, to e*oval pusuant to Section %.A5 of the (ode of /-la's 'hich espondents coectl dispute citin+ Section %.A! of the sa*e (ede. The afoe*entioned povisions state as follo's< Section %.A!. enure of Office.  3ll e9ecutive offices of the Societ e9cept the 09ecutive Seceta and the 3udito shall be elected the /oad of Diectos, fo a te* of one ea ind shall hold office until thei successos ae elected and have 1ualified. The 09ecutive seceta, the 3udito and all othe office es and e*ploees of the Societ shall hold office at the pleasue of the /oad of Diectos, unless thei te* of e*plo*ent shall have been fi9ed in thei contact of e*plo*ent. 999 999 999


5 of 7

GR. No. L-48928

Section %.A5. !emoval of Officers and "m#loyees.  3ll offices and e*ploees shall be sub:ect to suspension o e*oval fo a sufficient cause at an ti*e b affi*ative vote of a *a:oit of an the *e*bes of the /oad of Diectos, e9cept that e*ploees appointed b the Pesident alone o b the othe offices alone at the pleasue of the office appointin+ hi*. It appeas fo* the ecods, specificall the *inutes of the special *eetin+ of the Societ on 3u+ust ", #$%!, that petitione 'as desi+nated as 3ctin+ 09ecutive Seceta 'ith an honoaiu* of P!AA.AA *onthl in vie' of the application of D. 4ose E. /u8ta' fo leave effective Septe*be #, #$%! fo "AA 'o8in+ das. This desi+nation 'as fo*ali)ed in Special Ode No. ##A, s. #$%! 'heein it 'as indicated that< CThis desi+nation shall ta8e effect on Septe*be #, #$%! and shall e*ain until futhe advice.C In the o+ani)ational *eetin+ of the Societ on 3pil !6, #$%", the *inutes of the *eetin+ eveal that the (hai*an *entioned the need of appointin+ a pe*anent 09ecutive Seceta and stated that the fo*e 09ecutive Seceta, D. 4ose E. /u8ta', tendeed his application fo optional etie*ent, and 'hile on te*inal leave, D. Mita Pado de Tavea 'as appointed 3ctin+ 09ecutive Seceta. In vie' theeof, Don Fancisco Oti+as, 4. *oved, dul seconded, that D. Mita Pado de Tavea be appointed 09ecutive Seceta of the Philippine Tubeculosis Societ, Inc. The *otion 'as unani*ousl appoved. On 3pil !%, #$%", petitione 'as info*ed in 'itin+ of the said appoint*ent, to 'it< D. Mita Pado de Tavea Philippine Tubeculosis Societ, Inc. Manila Mada*< I a* pleased to info* ou that at the *eetin+ of the /oad of Diectos held on 3pil !6, #$%", ou 'ee

appointed

09ecutive

Seceta,

Philippine

Tubeculosis

Societ,

Inc.

'ith

such

co*pensation ,petition and allo'ances as ae povided fo in the /ud+et of the Societ, effective i**ediatel, vice D. 4ose E. /u8ta', etied. (on+atulations. Ve tul ous, Fo the /oad of Diectos< S+d Mi+uel (ani)aes, M.D. MI2?0; (3RI3R0S, M.D. Pesident 3lthou+h the *inutes of the o+ani)ational *eetin+ sho' that the (hai*an *entioned the need of appointin+ a Cpe*anentC 09ecutive Seceta, such state*ent alone cannot chaactei)e the appoint*ent of petitione 'ithout a contact of e*plo*ent definitel fi9in+ he te* because of the specific povision of Section %.A! of the (ode of /-;a's that< CThe 09ecutive Seceta, the 3udito, and all othe offices and e*ploees of the Societ shall hold office at the pleasue of the /oad of Diectos, unless thei te* of e*plo*ent shall have been fi9ed in thei contact of e*plo*ent.C /esides the 'od pe*anentC could have been used to distin+uish the appoint*ent fo* actin+ capacitC.


GR. No. L-48928

6 of 7

The absence of a fi9ed te* in the lette addessed to petitione info*in+ he of he appoint*ent as 09ecutive Seceta is ve si+nificant. This could have no othe i*plication than that petitione held an appoint*ent at the pleasue of the appointin+ po'e. 3n appoint*ent held at the pleasue of the appointin+ po'e is in essence te*poa in natue. It is co-e9tensive 'ith the desie of the /oad of Diectos. @ence, 'hen the /oad opts to eplace the incu*bent, technicall thee is no e*oval but onl an e9piation of te* and in an e9piation of te*, thee is no need of pio notice, due heain+ o sufficient +ounds befoe the incu*bent can be sepaated fo* office. The potection affoded b Section %.A5 of the (ode of /-;a's on Re*oval of Offices and 0*ploees, theefoe, cannot be clai*ed b  petitione. Thus, in the case of $oji vs. $ari%o #" S(R3 !$", 'hee the appoint*ent contains the follo'in+ poviso< that it *a be te*inated at anti*e 'ithout an poceedin+s, at the pleasue of the Pesident of the Philippines, this (out held< CIt *a, theefoe, be said that, thou+h not technicall a te*poa appoint*ent, as this te* is used in Section !5b of the (ivil Sevice 3ct of #$6$, petitione=s appoint*ent in essence is te*poa because of its chaacte that it is te*inable at the pleasue of the appointin+ po'e. /ein+ te*poa in natue, the appoint*ent can be te*inated at a *o*ent=s notice 'ithout need to sho' cause as e1uied in appoint*ents that belon+ to the classified sevice.C In Paragas vs. Bernal #% S(R3 #6A, this (out distin+uished bet'een e*oval and e9piation of te* . In the case at ba thee has been, ho'eve, no e*oval fo* office. Pusuant to the chate of Da+upan (it, the (hief of Police theeof holds office at the #leasure of the President . (onse1uentl, the te* of office of the (hief of Police e9pies at an ti*e that the Pesident *a so declae. This is not e*oval, inas*uch as the latte entails the ouste of an incu*bent before the e&#iration of his term. In the pesent case, petitione=s te* *eel e9pied upon eceipt b hi* of the co**unication of espondent 3ssistant 09ecutive Seceta of the Pesident, dated Septe*be #5, #$&!. Petitione cannot li8e'ise see8 elief fo* the +eneal povisions of the Ne' (ivil (ode on @u*an Relations no fo* the funda*ental pinciples of the Ne' (onstitution on pesevation of hu*an di+nit. Bhile these povisions pesent so*e basic pinciples that ae to be obseved fo the i+htful elationship bet'een hu*an bein+s and the stabilit of social ode, these ae *eel +uides fo hu*an conduct in the absence of specific le+al povisions and definite contactual stipulations. In the case at ba, the (ode of /-;a's of the Societ contains a specific povision +ovenin+ the te* of office of petitione. The sa*e necessail li*its he i+hts unde the Ne' (ivil (ode and the Ne' (onstitution upon acceptance of the appoint*ent. Moeove, the act of the /oad in declain+ he position as vacant is not onl in accodance 'ith the (ode of /;a's of the Societ but also *eets the e9actin+ standads of honest and +ood faith. The *eetin+ of Ma !$, #$%5, at 'hich petitione ,petitione=s position 'as declaed vacant, 'as ca+ed specificall to ta8e up the unfinished business of the Reo+ani)ational Meetin+ of the /oad of 3pil "A, #$%5. @ence, and act cannot be said to i*pat a dishonest pupose o so*e *oal obli1uit and conscious d oin+ to 'on+ but athe e*anates fo* the desie of the /oad to eo+ani)e itself. Finall, Be find it unnecessa to esolve the thid assi+n*ent of eo. The posciption a+ainst e*oval 'ithout :ust cause and due pocess of la' unde the (ivil Sevice ;a' does not have a beain+ on the case at ba fo the eason, as Be have e9plained, that thee 'as no e*oval in he case but *eel an e9piation of te* pusuant to Section %.A! of the (ode of /-;a's. @ence, 'hethe o not the petitione falls 'ithin the potective *antle of the (ivil Sevice ;a' is i**ateial and definitel unnecessa to esolve this case.


GR. No. L-48928

7 of 7

#EREFORE, pe*ises consideed, the decision of the lo'e cout holdin+ that petitione 'as not ille+all e*oved o ousted fo* he position as 09ecutive Seceta of the Philippine Tubeculosis Societ, Inc., is heeb

FFIRME!. SO OR!ERE!. eehan'ee (Chairman), *ernande+, and Plana, ., concu. $a'asiar, ., concu in the esult. $elencio-errera, ., too8 no pat.

054-Mita Pardo de Tavera vs. Tuberculosis Society 112 Scra 243

Recommend Documents