RepublicofthePhilippines

SUPREMECOURT
Manila
ENBANC
G.R.No.L6898April30,1954
LUISMANALANG,petitioner,
vs.
AURELIOQUITORIANO,EMILIANOMORABE,ZOSIMOG.
LINATO,andMOHAMADDEVENANCIO,respondents.
LuisManalanginhisownbehalf.
OfficeoftheSolicitorGeneralJuanLiwagandAssistantSolicitorGeneral
FranciscoCarreonfortherespondents.
CONCEPCION,J.:
PetitionerLuisManalangcontests,byquowarrantoproceedings,thetitleof
theincumbentCommissioneroftheNationalEmploymentService,and
seekstotakepossessionofsaidofficeasthepersonallegedlyentitled
thereto.
TheoriginalrespondentwasAurelioQuitoriano,who,atthetimeofthe
filingofthepetition(August4,1953),heldsaidoffice,whichheassumedon
July1,1953,byvirtueofadesignationmade,inhisfavor,asActing
CommissioneroftheNationalEmploymentService,bytheOfficeofthe
PresidentofthePhilippines.Subsequently,oronOctober22,1953,
petitionerincluded,asrespondents,EmilianoMorabe,who,onSeptember
11,1953,wasdesignatedActingcommissionerofNationalEmployment
Service,andZosimoG.Linato,theCollecting,DisbursingandProperty
OfficerofsaidNationalEmploymentServicehereinafterreferredto,for
thesakeofbrevity,astheServiceinordertorestrainhimfrompaying,to
respondentMorabe,thesalaryoftheCommissionerofsaidService.Still
later,oronJanuary21,1954,MohamaddeVenancio,whowasdesignated

ActingCommissionerofsaidService,andassumedsaidoffice,onJanuary
11and13,respectively,ofthesameyear,wasincludedasrespondent.
Itappearsthat,priortoJuly1,1953,andforsometimepriorthereto,
petitioner,LuisManalang,wasDirectorofthePlacementBureau,anoffice
createdbyExecutiveOrderNo.392,datedDecember31,1950(46Off.
Gaz.,No.12,pp.5913,59205921),avowedlypursuanttothepowersvested
inthePresidentbyRepublicActNo.422.OnJune20,1952,RepublicAct
No.761,entitled"AnActtoProvidefortheOrganizationofaNational
EmploymentService,"wasapprovedandbecameeffective.Section1
thereofpartlyprovides:
...Inordertoensurethebestpossibleorganizationofthe
employmentmarketasanintegralpartofthenationalprogram
fortheachievementandmaintenanceofmaximumemployment
andthedevelopmentanduseofproductiveresourcesthereis
herebyestablishedanationalsystemoffreepublicemployment
officestobeknownastheNationalEmploymentService,
hereinafterreferredtoastheService.theServiceshallbeunder
theexecutivesupervisionandcontroloftheDepartmentof
Labor,andshallhaveachiefwhoshallbeknownasthe
CommissioneroftheNationalemploymentServicehereinafter
referredtoasCommissioner.SaidCommissionershallbe
appointedbythePresidentofthePhilippineswiththeconsent
oftheCommissiononAppointmentsandshallreceive
compensationattherateofninethousandpesosperannum.A
DeputyCommissionershallbeappointedbythePresidentof
thePhilippineswiththeconsentoftheCommissionon
Appointmentsandshallreceivecompensationattherateof
seventhousandtwohundredpesosperannum.
OnJune1,1953,thethenSecretaryofLabor,JoseFigueras,recommended
theappointmentofpetitionerLuisManalangasCommissionerofthe
Service.OnJune29,1953,respondentAurelioQuitoriano,thenActing
SecretaryofLabor,madeasimilarrecommendationinfavorofManalang,
uponthegroundthat"heisbestqualified"and"loyaltoserviceand
administration."SaidActingSecretaryofLaboreveninformedManalang
thathewouldprobablybeappointedtotheofficeinquestion.However,on

July1,1953,Quitorianowastheonedesignated,andswornin,asActing
CommissioneroftheService.SuchdesignationofQuitorianolikethe
subsequentdesignation,first,ofEmilianoMorabe,andthe,ofMohamadde
VenancioisnowassailedbyManalangas"illegal"andequivalentto
removalofthepetitionerfromofficewithoutcause.
Thispretensecannotbesustained.Tobeginwith,petitionerhasneverbeen
CommissioneroftheNationalEmploymentServiceand,hence,hecouldnot
havebeen,andhasnotbeenremovedtherefrom.Secondly,toremovean
officeristoousthimfromofficebeforetheexpirationofhisterm.As
removalimpliesthattheofficeexistsaftertheouster.Suchisnotthecaseof
petitionerherein,forRepublicActNo.761expresslyabolishedthe
PlacementBureau,and,byimplication,theofficeofdirectorthereof,which,
obviously,cannotexistwithoutsaidBureau.Bytheabolitionofthelatter
andofsaidoffice,therighttheretoofitsincumbent,petitionerherein,was
necessarilyextinguishedthereby.Accordingly,theconstitutionalmandateto
theeffectthat"noofficeroremployeeinthecivilserviceshallberemoved
orsuspendedexceptforcauseasprovidedbylaw"(Art.XII,Sec.4,Phil.
Const.),isnotinpoint,fortherehasbeenneitheraremovalnorasuspension
ofpetitionerManalang,butanabolitionofhisformerofficeofDirectorof
thePlacementBureau,which,admittedly,iswithinthepowerofCongressto
undertakebylegislation.
Itisargued,however,inpetitioner'smemorandum,that
...thereisnoabolitionbutonlyfadingawayofthetitle
PlacementBureauandallitsfunctionsarecontinuedbythe
NationalEmploymentServicebecausethetwotitlescannotco
exist.Theseeminglyadditionaldutieswereonlybroughtabout
bytheadditionalfacilitieslikethedistrictoffices.Employment
ServiceAdvisoryCouncils,etc.
ThequestionwhetherornotRepublicActNo.761abolishedthePlacement
Bureauisoneoflegislativeintent,aboutwhichtherecanbenocontroversy
whatsoever,inviewoftheexplicitdeclarationinthesecondparagraphof
section1ofsaidActreading:
UpontheorganizationoftheService,theexistingPlacement
BureauandtheexistingEmploymentOfficeintheCommission

ofSocialWelfareshallbeabolished,andallthefiles,records,
supplies,equipment,qualifiedpersonnelandunexpended
balancesofappropriationsofsaidBureauandCommission
pertainingtosaidbureauorofficeshallthereuponbe
transferredtotheService.(Emphasissupplied.)
Incidentally,thistransferconnotesthattheNationalEmploymentServiceis
differentanddistinctfromthePlacementBureau,forathingmaybe
transferredonlyfromoneplacetoanother,nottothesameplace.Had
CongressintendedtheNationalEmploymentServicetobeamere
amplificationorenlargementofthePlacementBureau,RepublicActNo.
761wouldhavedirectedtheretentionofthe"qualifiedpersonnel"ofthe
latter,nottheirtransfertotheformer.Indeed,theServiceincludes,notonly
thefunctionspertainingtotheformerPlacementBureau,butalso,thoseof
theformerEmploymentOfficeintheCommissionofSocialWelfare,apart
fromotherpowers,notpertainingtoeitheroffice,enumeratedinsection4of
RepublicActNo.761.
Again,iftheabsorptionbytheServiceofthedutiesofthePlacement
Bureau,sufficedtojustifytheconclusionthattheformerandthelatterare
identical,thentheEmploymentOfficeintheCommissionofSocialWelfare,
wouldlogicallybeentitledtomakethesameclaim.Atanyrate,anypossible
doubt,onthispoint,isdispelledbythefactthat,inhissponsorshipspeech,
onthebillwhichlaterbecameRepublicActNo.761,SenatorMagalona
said:
ComoyahedichoalcaballerodeRizal,estaesunanueva
oficinaquetienesuesferadeacciondistintadeladecualquiera
delasdivisionesdelaOficinadeTrabajo.Ademas,comohe
dicho,esmuyimportantelacreaciondeestaoficina,porque
conellasetratadebuscarremedioparaesosdosmillonesde
desempleadosfilipinosquehayahora.(Vol.III,Congressional
Record,Senate,No.56,April23,1952;emphasissupplied.)
Itisnexturgedinpetitioner'smemorandum"thattheitemofNational
EmploymentServiceCommissionerisnotnewandisoccupiedbythe
petitioner"andthatthepetitionerisentitledtosaidoffice"automaticallyby
operationoflaw,"inviewoftheabovequotedprovisionofsection1of

RepublicActNo.761,relativetothetransfertotheserviceofthe"qualified
personnel"ofthePlacementBureauandoftheEmploymentOfficeinthe
CommissionofSocialWelfare.
Thiscontentionisinconsistentwiththeveryallegationsofpetitioner's
pleadings.Thus,inparagraph11ofhispetition,itisalleged"thatincreasing
theitemandelaboratingthetitleofacivilservant,althoughnecessitatinga
newappointment,doesnotmeantheoustingoftheincumbentordeclaring
theitemvacant."Inparagraph12ofthesamepleading,petitioneraverred
that"onoraboutJune25,1953,twodaysbeforethedepartureofPresident
QuirinotoBaltimore,petitionerwroteaconfidentialmemorandumtoHis
Excellencyremindinghimofthenecessityofappointinganewthepetitioner
asheadoftheNationalEmploymentService."
Havingthusadmittedandcorrectlythatheneededanewappointment
asCommissioneroftheNationalEmploymentService,itfollowsthat
petitionerdoesnotholdor,inhisownwords,occupythelatter'sitem,
inasmuchastherighttheretomaybeacquiredonlybyappointment.Whatis
more,RepublicActNo.761requiresspecificallythatsaidappointmentbe
madebythePresidentofthePhilippines'withtheconsentofthe
CommissiononAppointments."HowcouldthePresidentandthe
CommissiononAppointmentsperformtheseactsiftheDirectorofthe
PlacementBureauautomaticallybecameCommissioneroftheNational
EmploymentService?
Neithermaypetitionerprofitbytheprovisionofthesecondparagraphof
section1ofRepublicActNo.761,concerningthetransfertotheServiceof
the"qualifiedpersonnel"ofthePlacementBureauandoftheEmployment
OfficeintheCommissionofSocialWelfare,because:
1.Saidtransfershallbeaffectedonly"upontheorganization"ofthe
NationalEmploymentService,whichdoesnottakeplaceuntilafterthe
appointmentof,atleast,thecommissionerthereof.IftheDirectorofthe
PlacementBureauwereincludedinthephrase"qualifiedpersonnel"and,as
aconsequence,heautomaticallybecameCommissioneroftheService,the
latterwouldhavebecomeorganizedsimultaneouslywiththeapprovalof
RepublicActNo.761,andthesamewouldnothaveconditionedthe
aforementionedtransfer"upontheorganizationoftheService,"which
connotesthatthenewofficewouldbeestablishedatsomefuturetime.

Indeed,incommonparlance,theword"personnel"isusedgenerallytorefer
tothesubordinateofficialsorclericalemployeesofanofficeorenterprise,
nottothemanagersdirectorsorheadsthereof.
2.If"qualifiedpersonnel"includedtheheadsoftheofficesaffectedbythe
establishmentoftheService,thenitwould,also,includethechiefofthe
EmploymentOfficeintheCommissionofSocialWelfare,who,following
petitioner'slineofargument,would,likepetitionerherein,be,also,a
CommissioneroftheNationalEmploymentService.Theresultwouldbe
thatwewouldhaveeithertwocommissionersofsaidServiceora
CommissionthereofconsistingoftwopersonsinsteadofaCommissioner
andneitheralternativeiscountenancedbyRepublicActNo.761.
3.CongresscannoteitherappointtheCommissioneroftheService,or
imposeuponthePresidentthedutytoappointanyparticularpersontosaid
office.TheappointingpoweristheexclusiveprerogativeofthePresident,
uponwhichnolimitationsmaybeimposedbyCongress,exceptthose
resultingfromtheneedofsecuringtheconcurrenceoftheCommissionon
Appointmentsandfromtheexerciseofthelimitedlegislativepowerto
prescribethequalificationstoagivenappointiveoffice.
Petitionerallegesinparagraph2ofhispetition,whichhasbeenadmittedby
therespondents:
Thathestartedasclerkin1918intheBureauofLaborby
reasonofhiscivilservicesecondplaceeligibilitythathewas
appointedpublicdefender,InchargeofthePampangaAgency,
in1937likewise,asaresultofhiscivilservicepublicdefender
eligibilityandhassuccessivelyheldthepositionsofChiefof
SocialImprovementDivision,SeniorAssistantintheOfficeof
theSecretaryofLabor,ChiefoftheWageClaimsDivision,
AttorneyofLabor(InchargeoftheCivilCase),Chiefofthe
AdministrativeDivision,ChiefofthelaborInspectionDivision
andDirectorofthePlacementBureau,alsounderthe
DepartmentofLabor.
ThemanyyearsspentbypetitionerintheserviceoftheGovernmenthave
notescapedtheattentionoftheCourt.Forthisreason,wehaveeven
consideredwhetherornotheshouldbeheldentitledtothepositionof

DeputyCommissioneroftheNationalEmploymentService,whichcarriesa
compensationofP7,200.00perannum,identicaltothatofDirectorofthe
PlacementBureau.However,itisourconsideredopinionthatwecannot
makesaidfinding,notonlybecausetheofficeofDeputyCommissionerof
theNationalEmploymentServiceisbeyondthepaleoftheissuesraisedin
thisproceedings,whicharelimitedtothepositionofCommissionerofsaid
Service,but,also,becausethereasonsmilitatingagainstpetitioner'sclaimto
thelatterposition,applyequallytothatofDeputyCommissioner.Atany
rate,petitioner'srecordasapublicservantnomatterhowimpressiveit
maybeasanargumentinfavorofhisconsiderationforappointmenteither
asCommissionerorasDeputyCommissioneroftheServiceisamatter
whichshouldbeaddressedtotheappointingpowerintheexerciseofits
soundjudgmentanddiscretion,anddoesnotsufficetogranttheCourt,
whosedutyismerelytoapplythelaw,thepowertovestinhimalegaltitle
whichhedoesnothave.
Wherefore,thepetitionisherebydismissedandthewritprayedfordenied,
withoutcosts.
Pablo,Bengzon,Reyes,Jugo,BautistaAngelo,andLabrador,JJ.,concur.