Anzaldo vs Clave

GR L-54597 15 December 1982

Facts: The Science Research Supervisor II position was vacant and both Dr Felicidad Anzaldo and Dr Eulalia Venzon were next-in-rank for the said position. Venzon was recommended for the position to w/c Anzaldo protested. The position was not filled up until NIST OIC appointed Anzaldo to that position. The same was approved by Civil Service Commission. Venzon contested this and appealed to the Office of the President. This protest was sent to Civil Service Commission and was decided in favour of Venzon by Chairman Jacobo Clave. Anzaldo’s motion for reconsideration was denied and she appealed to Office of the President to w/c Clave is concurrently Presidential Executive Assistant. Appeal was revoked and ruled as “as recommended by the Civil Service Commission.”

Issue: Whether or not Clave denied due process to Anzaldo on the ground of grave abuse of discretion?

Decision: Decision of respondent set aside and Anzaldo’s appointment declared valid. Due process of law means fundamental fairness. It is not fair to Anzaldo that Presidential Executive Assistant Clave should decide whether his own recommendation as Chairman of the Civil Service Commission, as to w/c doctor should be appointed for the position, should be adopted by the President of the Philippines. Common sense and propriety dictate that the commissioner in the Civil Service Commission, who should be consulted by the Office of the President, should be a person different from the person in the Office of the President who would decide the appeal of the protestant in a contested appointment.