1) Ruben Villaluz, the Administrator of the Motor Vehicles Office, was accused of gross mismanagement and inefficiency by a Congressional committee.
2) Based on the committee's findings, Villaluz was suspended from office by the Executive Secretary and investigated.
3) After investigation, the President issued an order removing Villaluz from office due to the charges against him.
1) Ruben Villaluz, the Administrator of the Motor Vehicles Office, was accused of gross mismanagement and inefficiency by a Congressional committee.
2) Based on the committee's findings, Villaluz was suspended from office by the Executive Secretary and investigated.
3) After investigation, the President issued an order removing Villaluz from office due to the charges against him.
1) Ruben Villaluz, the Administrator of the Motor Vehicles Office, was accused of gross mismanagement and inefficiency by a Congressional committee.
2) Based on the committee's findings, Villaluz was suspended from office by the Executive Secretary and investigated.
3) After investigation, the President issued an order removing Villaluz from office due to the charges against him.
B!"#$%#! A&'()o, *.+ ,ACTS+ In a letter dated January 28, 1960, Congressman Joaquin R. Roces as Chairman of the Committee on ood o!ernment of the "ouse of Re#resentati!es informed the $resident of the $hili##ines of the findings made %y his Committee regarding the alleged gross mismanagement and inefficiency committed %y Ru%en &illalu' (#etitioner) in *otor &ehicles +ffice. ,he allegations -ere as follo-s. 1) mal#ractice in office resulting in huge losses to the go!ernment/ 2) failure to correct inadequate controls or intentional toleration of the same, facilitating there%y the commission of graft and corru#tion/ and 0) negligence to remedy unsatisfactory accounting. Cong. Roces recommended the re#lacement of &illalu', his assistant chief 1urelio de 2eon, and a com#lete re!am# of the offices coming under the *otor &ehicles +ffice. ,hrough the 3ecretary of $u%lic 4or5s and Communications, &illalu' -as furnished a co#y of the #etition requiring him to e6#lain -ithin 72 hours -hy no administrati!e action should %e ta5en against him. &illalu' denied all the charges. +n 8e%ruary 19, 1960, :6ecuti!e 3ecretary ;atalio $. Castillo sus#ended &illalu' ha!ing created an in!estigating committee -ith the only #ur#ose of in!estigating the charges against #etitioner and his assistant. 1fter the in!estigation, the $resident issued 1dministrati!e +rder ;o. 002 decreeing the remo!al from office of the #etitioner. 1#olonio $onio -as a##ointed in his stead. &illalu' filed a motion for reconsideration and<or reinstatement -hich -as denied. "ence, he filed a #etition in this Court see5ing reinstatement as the 1dministrator of the *otor &ehicles +ffice. ISSUE+ 4hether or not the $resident has =urisdiction to in!estigate and remo!e the 1dministrator from office e!en if the latter is under the control and su#er!ision of the >e#artment of $u%lic 4or5s. -ELD+ ,here is no error of #rocedure committed %y res#ondents insofar as the in!estigation and disci#linary action ta5en against #etitioner. ?eing a #residential a##ointee, the 1dministrator of the *otor &ehicles +ffice %elongs to the non@com#etiti!e or unclassified ser!ice of the go!ernment. 1s such, he can only %e in!estigated and remo!ed from office after due hearing %y the $resident of the $hili##ines under the #rinci#le that Athe #o-er to remo!e is inherent in the #o-er to a##ointB as can %e im#lied from 3ection 9 of Re#u%lic 1ct ;o. 2260 (1n act to amend and re!ise the la-s relati!e to $hili##ine Ci!il 3er!ice). Consequently, the Commissioner of Ci!il 3er!ice is -ithout =urisdiction to hear and decide the administrati!e charges filed against the 1dministrator. ,he authority of Commissioner to #ass u#on questions of sus#ension, se#aration or remo!al can only %e e6ercised -ith referenced to #ermanent officials and em#loyees in the classified ser!ice. $etition is denied.