CASIANO V. CA WILLS AND SUCCESSION FULL TEXT REVOCATION
commercial law
Leonor v. CAFull description
Digest for Magsaysay v. AganFull description
credit case digest
1
MATEO v CA
August 14, 1995 | Puno, J. | Review on Certiorari | Jurisdiction Sta. Maria, then enera! Manager o" M#$A%, was &!aced under &reventive sus&ension 'e"ore 'eing ter(inated ') the *o% o" M#$A%. +e "i!ed a s&ecia s&ecia!! civi! civi! action action "or quo warranto warranto and and mandamus. mandamus. he *oard (oved to dis(iss the case, on the ground o" the RC-s !ac o" /urisdiction over disci&!ina disci&!inar) r) actions actions o" govern(ent govern(ent e(&!o)ees. e(&!o)ees. RC RC denied denied the (otion. CA dis(issed the *oard-s &etition. he SC granted the &etition and set aside the CA decision, sa)ing that the CSC, not the RC, had /urisdiction to entertain cases invo!ving the dis(issa! o" o""icers and e(&!o)ees under the Civi! Service 0aw. hiring and "iring o" e(&!o)ees e(&!o)ees o" #CCs are governed ') DOCTRINE: he hiring the &rovision o" the Civi! Service 0aw and Ru!es and Regu!ations. RCs have no /urisdiction to entertain cases invo!ving dis(issa! o" o""icers and e(&!o)ees covered ') the Civi! Service 0aw. E(&!o)ees o" #CC with origina! charter "a!! under the /urisdiction o" the CSC.
ISSUE/S: $#;
RC o" Ri6a! has /urisdiction over cases invo!ving dis(issa! o" an e(&!o)ee o" a NO
SUMMARY: Edgar
FACTS
1. &on &on co(&!a co(&!aint int o" so(e so(e Morong Morong $ater $ater %istri %istrict ct 2M#$A 2M#$A%3 %3 e(&!o) e(&!o)ees, ees, &etitioners, a!! *oard Me('ers o" M#$A%, conducted an investigation on &rivate res&ondent Edgar Sta. Maria, then enera! Manager. +e was then &!aced under &reventive sus&ension, !ater dis(issed on Januar) , 199. Ma6i(o San %iego was designated in his &!ace. 7. Sta. Maria "i!ed a S&ecia! S&ecia! Civi! Action "or Quo Warranto Warranto and Mandamus and Mandamus with Pre!i(inar) 8n/unction 2 'e"ore the RC o" Ri6a! cha!!enging his dis(issa! ') &etitioners. +e averred that the &etitioners uni!atera!!) sto&&ed and &rohi'ited hi( "ro( eercising eercising his rights rights and &er"or(ing &er"or(ing his duties duties as enera! Manager Manager and cons&ired to re(ove hi( "ro( #""ice whi!e he was out o" o""ice on o""icia! trave!. . Petitioners (oved to dis(iss the case on the grounds that 213 the court had no /urisdiction over disci&!inar) actions o" govern(ent e(&!o)ees which is vested ec!usive!) in the Civi! Service Co((ission: and that 273 quo warranto was not the &ro&er re(ed). his his was denied. CA !iewise dis(issed their &etition &etition "or certiorari.
RULING:
Petition granted. CA decision annu!!ed and set aside.
