[G.R. No. 46570. April 21, 1939.

]
JOSE D. VILLENA, petitioner, vs . THE SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR,
respondent.
FACTS: The Investigation Division of the DOJ, upon the request of the respondent, the
Secretary of Interior conducted an inquiry into the conduct of the Jose Villena, mayor of
Makati, Rizal, as a result of which the latter was found to have committed bribery,
extortion, malicious abuse of authority ad unauthorized practice of the law profession.
The Secretary of the Interior suspended the petitioner from office and then and
thereafter wired the Provincial Governor of Rizal with instruction that the petitioner be
advised accordingly. The respondent then wrote the petitioner a letter, specifying the
many charges against him and notifying him of the designation of Emiliano Anonas as
special investigator to investigate the charges. The respondent recommended the
suspension of Villena to the President of the Philippines, in which it was verbally granted.
The Secretary then suspended Villena from office. Villena filed a petition for preliminary
injunction against the Secretary to restrain him and his agents from proceeding with the
investigation.
ISSUE: Whether or not the Secretary of the Interior has jurisdiction or authority to
suspend and order investigation over Villena.
HELD: There is no clear and express grant of power to the Secretary to suspend
and order investigation over a Mayor Villena. On the contrary, the power appears lodged
in the provincial governor by sec 2188 of the Administrative Code which provides that
The provincial governor shall receive and investigate complaints made under oath
against municipal officers for neglect of duty, oppression, corruption or other form of
maladministration of office, and conviction by final judgment of any crime involving
moral turpitude. The fact, however, that the power of suspension is expressly
granted by sec 2188 of the Administrative Code to the provincial governor
does not mean that the grant is necessarily exclusive and precludes the
Secretary of the Interior from exercising a similar power. For instance, counsel for
the petitioner admitted in the oral argument that the President of the Philippines
may himself suspend the petitioner from office in virtue of his greater power of
removal (sec. 2191, as amended, Administrative Code) to be exercised
conformably to law. Indeed, if the President could, in the manner prescribed by law,
remove a municipal official; it would be a legal incongruity if he were to be devoid of the
lesser power of suspension. And the incongruity would be more patent if, possessed of
the power both to suspend and to remove a provincial official (sec. 2078, Administrative
Code), the President were to be without the power to suspend a municipal official. The
power to suspend a municipal official is not exclusive. Preventive suspension
may be issued to give way for an impartial investigation.
The Principle of Qualified Political Agency which provides that the acts of the
department secretaries, performed and promulgated in the regular course of business,
are, unless disapproved or reprobated by the President, presumptively the acts of the
President. The power to suspend may be exercised by the President. It follows that the
heads of the Department under her may also exercise the same, unless the law required
the President to act personally or that situation demanded him so, because the heads of
the departments are assistants and agents of the President.