Sunday, June 25, 2017

CESB, et al v. CSC, et al (March 7, 2017)

The Career Executive Service Board (CESB) cannot in the guise of enforcing and administering the policies of the Third Level, validly impose qualifications in addition to what the law prescribe. It cannot add another layer of qualification requirement which is not otherwise specified in the statutes. In promulgating the assailed resolution (CESB Resolution No. 918), which sets out additional qualifications for the subject positions in the Public Attorneys Office (PAO), the CESB has overstepped the bounds of its authority. Positions in the PAO that do not require Third Level Eligibility and CESO rank for purposes of tenurial security: (a) Chief Public Attorney; (b) Deputy Chief Public Attorneys; (c) Regional Public Attorneys; (d) Assistant Regional Public Attorneys.
The case involves the classification of positions belonging to the Career Executive Service (CES) and the qualifications for these posts, which matters are clearly within the scope of the powers granted to the CESB under the Administrative Code and the Integrated Reorganizational Plan. However, this fact alone does not push the matter beyond the reach of the Civil Service Commission (CSC). To require the occupants of the subject PAO positions to possess Third Level Eligibility would be to amend the law and defeat its spirit and intent. It would be improper for the CESB to impose this additional qualification as a pre-requisite to permanent appointments. To do so would amend and overrule Congress.