Key Takeaway: Lateral Transfers in the Civil Service Do Not Automatically Guarantee Reinstatement

Marey Beth D. Marzan v. City Government of Olongapo, et al., G.R. No. 232769, November 03, 2020

Imagine being abruptly removed from a position you’ve held for years, only to find out that your transfer to another role doesn’t guarantee your return. This is the reality Marey Beth D. Marzan faced, highlighting the complexities of civil service employment in the Philippines. In her case, the Supreme Court ruled on the nuances of lateral transfers and the right to security of tenure, a decision that has significant implications for government employees nationwide.

Marey Beth D. Marzan, a department head in the City Planning and Development Office of Olongapo City, was laterally transferred to the City Budget Office. When her appointment to the new position was disapproved, she was terminated without being reinstated to her former role. The central legal question was whether she could compel her reinstatement through a writ of mandamus, and whether her lateral transfer should automatically revert her to her previous position.

Legal Context: Understanding Civil Service Transfers and Security of Tenure

In the Philippine civil service, the concept of a lateral transfer is distinct from a promotion. A lateral transfer involves moving from one position to another of equivalent rank, level, or salary, without a break in service. On the other hand, a promotion entails advancement to a position with increased duties and responsibilities, often accompanied by a salary increase.

The right to security of tenure is a fundamental principle in civil service law, ensuring that employees cannot be removed from their positions without just cause. However, the application of this right can be complex, especially in cases involving transfers. The Civil Service Commission (CSC) plays a crucial role in regulating appointments and transfers, as outlined in the Omnibus Rules Implementing Book V of Executive Order No. 292 and CSC Memorandum Circular No. 40-98.

Section 13 of the Omnibus Rules states that all appointments involved in a chain of promotions must be submitted simultaneously for approval by the CSC. If the appointment to a higher position is disapproved, those in lower positions are automatically restored to their former roles. However, this provision does not apply to lateral transfers, which was a critical point in Marzan’s case.

Consider a scenario where a government employee, like a city planner, is transferred to another department within the same local government unit. If the new role is of equivalent rank and the transfer is not part of a chain of promotions, the employee cannot rely on Section 13 for automatic reinstatement if the new appointment is disapproved.

Case Breakdown: The Journey of Marey Beth D. Marzan

Marey Beth D. Marzan’s journey began with her appointment as City Government Department Head II of the City Planning and Development Office (CPDO) in Olongapo City in January 2008. This appointment was approved by the CSC in June 2011, granting her permanent status.

In December 2011, she was laterally transferred to the City Budget Office (CBO) by then-Mayor James Gordon, Jr. Marzan accepted this transfer, which was facilitated by the Acting Chief Administrative Officer of the Human Resource Management Office. However, in August 2013, the CSC disapproved her appointment to the CBO due to discrepancies in the dates of issuance and approval.

Following the disapproval, Marzan received a termination letter from the City Government of Olongapo, effective September 14, 2013. She sought clarification from the CSC and attempted to continue working, but was forcibly evicted from her office on September 13, 2013.

Marzan filed a Petition for Mandamus with the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Olongapo City, seeking reinstatement to her former position at the CPDO. The RTC dismissed her petition, a decision upheld by the Court of Appeals (CA). Marzan then appealed to the Supreme Court, arguing that her lateral transfer should have automatically reinstated her to her previous role under Section 13 of the Omnibus Rules.

The Supreme Court, in its decision, emphasized the distinction between promotions and lateral transfers. It stated, “Section 13, Rule VI presupposes that the appointment of the official or employee concerned constitutes a promotion.” The Court also noted that Marzan’s transfer was not part of a series of promotions, and thus, Section 13 did not apply.

Furthermore, the Court clarified that Marzan’s reinstatement was a discretionary act by the appointing authority, not a ministerial duty that could be compelled by mandamus. The Court ruled, “Mandamus will not lie to compel the performance of a discretionary act.”

Practical Implications: Navigating Civil Service Transfers

The Supreme Court’s ruling in Marzan’s case sets a precedent for how lateral transfers are treated in the civil service. Government employees must understand that accepting a lateral transfer does not guarantee automatic reinstatement to their previous position if the new appointment is disapproved.

For civil servants, it is crucial to be aware of the terms of their appointment and to seek clarification from the CSC if any issues arise. Employers should ensure that all appointment processes are transparent and comply with CSC regulations to avoid disputes.

Key Lessons:

• Understand the difference between a promotion and a lateral transfer.
• Be aware that lateral transfers do not automatically guarantee reinstatement to a previous position.
• Seek guidance from the CSC if there are concerns about the validity of an appointment or transfer.
• Exhaust administrative remedies before resorting to judicial action.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is a lateral transfer in the civil service?

A lateral transfer is the movement of an employee from one position to another of equivalent rank, level, or salary without a break in service.

Can a lateral transfer lead to automatic reinstatement if the new appointment is disapproved?

No, a lateral transfer does not automatically guarantee reinstatement to a previous position if the new appointment is disapproved, as per the Supreme Court’s ruling in Marzan’s case.

What should a civil servant do if their appointment is disapproved?

They should file an appeal with the CSC Regional Office within the prescribed period and follow the procedure outlined in the Revised Rules on Administrative Cases in the Civil Service.

Can mandamus be used to compel reinstatement in cases of lateral transfers?

No, mandamus cannot be used to compel reinstatement in cases of lateral transfers, as reinstatement is a discretionary act by the appointing authority.

How can civil servants protect their rights during transfers?

Civil servants should ensure they understand the terms of their appointment, seek clarification from the CSC if necessary, and exhaust all administrative remedies before pursuing judicial action.

ASG Law specializes in civil service law and employment issues. Contact us or email hello@asglawpartners.com to schedule a consultation.