Professional Documents
Culture Documents
(PUBOFF) Español V CSC
(PUBOFF) Español V CSC
*
G.R. No. 85479. March 3, 1992.
_______________
* EN BANC.
716
central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/000001750c6f4a9db6ba2f69003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 1/11
10/9/2020 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 206
REGALADO, J.:
_______________
717
central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/000001750c6f4a9db6ba2f69003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 2/11
10/9/2020 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 206
_______________
718
central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/000001750c6f4a9db6ba2f69003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 3/11
10/9/2020 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 206
‘From the above comparative data, it is evident that both contestants meet
the qualification requirements for the position. In fact their individual
qualifications exceed those requirements especially that (sic) of Engr.
Bulseco.’
719
central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/000001750c6f4a9db6ba2f69003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 4/11
10/9/2020 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 206
‘Although both may be considered for promotion and that the next-in-
rank should be given preference for promotion, the appointing authority
may appoint an employee who is not next-in-rank so as to choose only the
most competent and best qualified for the position.’
xxx
_______________
720
central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/000001750c6f4a9db6ba2f69003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 5/11
10/9/2020 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 206
Petitioner
7
contends that on the basis of the organizational
chart of the NIA, he is considered as next-in-rank to the
contested position and, therefore, he has a promotional
priority over respondent Bulseco. He likewise claims that
assuming that the second paragraph of Section 4 of
Resolution No. 83-343 provides an exception to the next-in-
rank rule, the same shall apply only when the person who
is next-in-rank merely meets the minimum requirements,
but not where, as in the case of herein petitioner, the
qualifications of the next-in-rank far exceed the
requirements for appointment to the contested position. In
other words, petitioner is of the opinion that one who is not
next-in-rank may be promoted only if the next-in-rank
merely meets the minimum requirements for the position.
However, where the qualifications of the next-in-rank
exceeds the minimum requirements, it is mandatory that
the next-in-
_______________
721
_______________
8 Luego vs. Civil Service Commission, et al., 143 SCRA 327 (1986);
Patagoc vs. Civil Service Commission, et al., 185 SCRA 411 (1990);
Lapinid vs. Civil Service Commission, et al., G.R. No. 96298, May 14,
1991.
9 131 SCRA 66 (1984).
722
central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/000001750c6f4a9db6ba2f69003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 7/11
10/9/2020 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 206
_______________
723
_______________
11 Abila vs. Civil Service Commission, et al., G.R. No. 92573, June 3,
1991.
12 Santiago, Jr. vs. Civil Service Commission, et al., 178 SCRA 733
(1989).
724
_______________
13 Gaspar vs. Court of Appeals, et al., 190 SCRA 774 (1990); Chang vs.
Civil Service Commission, et al., 191 SCRA 663 (1990).
725
central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/000001750c6f4a9db6ba2f69003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 10/11
10/9/2020 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 206
Petition dismissed.
——o0o——
726
central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/000001750c6f4a9db6ba2f69003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 11/11