Rare Periodicals

Supreme Court Decisions, Orias et al., vs. Ribo et al. - Justine Padilla.pdf

Media

Part of The Lawyers Journal

extracted text

and oidered that the record 'be forWarded to the 1atler Court for v whatever action it may deem proper to take in the premises. TEODULO T. ORIAS, ET AL., VS. MAMERTO S. RIBO ET. AL., It appears that while the trial court was in the process of re- G.R. No. L-4945, October 28, 1953. ceiving evidence on the dama&"eS incident . to the issuance of ~he writ of preliminary injunction, Lucia Javier, the defendant, died and because of this supervening event, the trial court ent~rtainti'd the view that the claim for damages should be denied because that claim should be filed against the estate o( the deceased; It also / appears that, when respondent pressed for action on his motion for assessment of damages, counsel for the bonding party, Alto Surety Company, opposed said move on the ground that the action contemplated is too late because the order of the trial court denying respondent's motion for reconsideration and cancelling the bond filed by the surety has already become final and unappealable; and considering that a petition for damages holding the surety liable should be filed bdoi·e judgment becomes final, the court sustained ADMINISTRATIVE CODE; TEMPORARY APPOINTMENT WITHOUT EXAMINATION AND· CERTIFICATION BY THE CIVIL SERVICE.-Appointments under Sec. 682 of the Hcviscd Administrative Code, as amended by Com. Acts Nos. 177 and 281 are temporary, when the public interests so require and only upon the prior authbrization of t he Commissioner of Civil the opposition and denied the motion to assess damages. The incident is now before this Court for the corres1ionding appropriate action. The finding of the trial coul't that the claim for damages of respondent should be denied because of the death of the debtor, Lucia Javier, and the claim should be. filed against the estate of the latter, is not well taken. This result 011ly obtains if the claim is for recovery of money, debt or interest thereon, and tl1e defendant dies before final judgment in the Court of First Instance, (Rule 3, Section 21, Rules of Court), but not when the claim is for damages for an injui'Y to person or property, (Ruic 68, S.ection 1, I dem). In the present proceeding, the claim for damages had arisen, not while the action was pending in the Court of First Instance, but after the case had been decided by the Supreme Court. Moreover, the claim of respondent is not merely for money or debt but for damages to said respondent. Thus, Chief Justice Moran, commenting on .Soction 1, Ruic 3, says : "The above section has now removed all doubts by expressly 1iroviding that the action should be discontinued upon defendant's death if it is for the recovery of moneY, debt, or interest thereon, while, on the other hand, in Rwle 88, Section 1, it is provided that nctivns to recover damages for injitry tv person or .property, real or personal, many be maintained against t he executor or daministrator of the deceased." <Moran, Comments on the Ru'Jes of Court., Vol. 1, 1952 ed., p. 109.) On the otheJ" han<l, under Ru!e 3, Section 17, Rules of Court, when a party dies and the claim is not thereby extinguished, the court shall order the legal representative of the deceased, or the heirs to be substituted for him within a period of 30 days, or with· in such time as may be granted. Here, it appears that no step has so far been taken relative to the settlement of the estate, nor an executor or administrator of the estate has been appointed. This deficiency may be obviated by ni;?.king the heirs take the place of the deceased. The claim that t he move of respondent to have the damages assessed against Lucia Javier has come late because the order of the couit denying the motion for reconsideration of respondent and cancelling the bond filed by the surety has already become fina.l and unappealable, is not also well taken, it appearing that the motmn of respondent pressing for action on the motion to assess damages was filed only five days after said order has been entered. It should be noted that the original order entered by the court on April 7, 1953, was not a denial of the claim but merely a statement of its view that no action thereon can be taken in view of the death of Lucia Javier because in its opinion the claim should be filed against her estate, and the order which ordered the cancellation of the bond was entered only on May 27, 1953. It appearing that the trial court has refrained from assessing the damages which it was directed to assess in the resolution of thi_s _Court issued on November 21, 1951, for reasons which, in the opm1on of the couit, are not well founded, it is the sense of this Court that the record should be remanded to the trial court for it to act as directed in said resolution. Parus, Br.ny;o11, 1'uozo11, Heyt>s, FadiU,1, iUonfemayor, Juyo, and LuliMdor, concur. Pablo, J. took no pa1-t. Service, not to exceed three mont.hs and in no ca.se shall extend beyond thirty days from receipt by the chief of the bureau or office of the Commissioner's certification of eligibles. Id., Id. - The fact that the peitioners who were appointed under Sec. 682 of the Revised Administrative Code as amended by Com. Acls Nos. 177 and 281 held the positions for more than thre<" months does not make them civil service eligibles. IJ., Id. - The fact that the acting Commissioner of Civil Service authorized their appointments "u:1der section 682 of the Revised Administ!'ative Code W continue only until replaced by an eligible" docs not make them eligibles. ' hi., Id. - The hol<liug of a JJOsition by a temporary appointee until replaced by an eligible in disl'egard of the lime limitation of three month3 is unauthorizeP. and illegal. Id., Id. - The temporary appointment of other non-eligibles to replace those whose term have expired is not prohibited. Pri:scv ill. Bitos for res1wnde1ds-appellant1J and Gow::ales and Acasio 'fo1· reispondeufs-a.ppellees, Pruvi11cial Guards. Filcmon Saavedra for /l(fitioners-appellanfis. DECISION PADILLA, J.: This is a petition for a writ of (/IW warm11fo to test the legality of the a1ipointmcnts of Isidro Magallanes as deputy provincial warJen, Pedro Floi·ca as cor1Joral of the 11rovincial guards, and Crisanto Cab, Da.lmacio CoJ"lel, Rafael Galleon, Bienvenido Gonzales, Filomeno Adobas, Franciscv Tavera, Jacinto Barro, Constancio Acasio, Teresa Caindoy, Narciso Ravago and Arcadia Maglines, as provincial guards of Lcytc, with Station at Maasin; and of 111-andanms to compel the respondent Mamerto S. Ribo in his capacity as provincial governor to reinstate the petitioners in the positions held by his co-respondents named above, and him <Ribo) and Melecio Palma, the latter in his capacity as provincial treasurer of Leytc, to pay the unpaid sale.ries allegedly due the petitioners from 1 November 1950 up to the final disposition of this case, and Francisco P. Lopez, in his capacity as clerk of the Court oi First lllstancc of Lcytc, to turn over to the JJctitioncrs all the prisoners in the pro_vincia.l jail. Simultaneously on 12 April 1951 the parties entered into the following stipulations of facts, the fil·st reading as followsThe petitioners and the respondents Provincial Goveri1or Mamerto S. Ribo and Provincial Treasm·er Melecio Palma assisted by their respective counsels l1ave come to the following: AGREED STATEMENTS OF FACTS J . Tlw.t residences of 11eti~ionera and 1·es110ndents are admitte<l to be that of Leyte as well as of iheir respective capacities; 2. That the respondents admit the appointment and commissions of the petitioners per Exhibits A, A-1 to A-14. In each and every appointment Qf said petitions appear the following authorization by the Acting Commissioner of Civil Service: "AUTHORIZED under Sec. 682 ot the Revised Adminislra.tive Code to continue only until replaced by an eligible, but not beyond thil·ty <30) days from the date of receipt of the certification of eligibles, provided, there is no qualified employee from the ranks who may be promotl'd to the positions involved. <Sgd.> Acting Commissioner of Civil Service" 3. That the respondent Govt:mor Ribo addressed a communicatio11 to petitioners infol'lning the latter t-hat their servi<:es were onlered tCl'minatcd as of the lasl worki11g hours of October 31, l!J50; 4. That the 1istitionet·s arc a.11 marricd and have their children except Felipe Enelo, Vedasto CabaleS and Teotimo Mullet who arc still single; G. That the petitioners have not received their salaries corFcoruary 28, 1954 THE LAWYERS JOURNAL 71 72 responding to the period from. OctobeF 16 to October 31, 1950 I. ~::t'ui:' T~'"'i'::"!:f~u exce:~ ;nh;t::~i~yn!~ 81:i~1~~!~7:::;s have not been given their ~: g~~l~0~~0~:f;~~~•·cs Date of Appolntmtnt ::ie1>l. l.1949 &pt. I. 1\149 Sept. I, 1949 ::iept. 1.1949 Sept. I, 1949 Sept. I, 1949 Date Aut1111.e.l Sevt. Z.1949 Sept.Z.1949 S..pt.Z.1949 Sept. Z.1949 Sept. 2. 1949 Sept.Z. 1949 P<ulllou Sirt .• P. G. P. G. P. G. P. i.;. :l:~~e~rc:s:~:;ponding to the ]Jeriod from November 1, 1950 up ~-: ~=~3~:~d~~~ro h · · d · d 8 Nicom<:!des Conejo.; S.,pt. 1949 r. G. P. G. Scpt.2.1949 P. G. by t~~ :~~~:~:1 P~~~~°::i::s r~:!!~:; i~ ~~e~;n;ot~~; :~·d e;c~:~~:(\ :,i_.~ : _ : r:r~~~it~~aJ!=~~~a l~f:t l:H still the Provincial Jail proper in the court house of the Court Fc li11e Enelo Sept. 1949 ~f:t: t I::·'::·':~·::,' ~~~~: i: P. G. P. G. P. G. f'. G. of Firs~ Instance, Maasin, Leytc, until Janua!'y 8, lfl51, pursuant lt }:fJ:.,d~tar~cin ~::t: m; !: t::;r t:~:;:::o~a~~~t ~:~:~::; ~~ clo9v5e;eiy b~:~~;· a~~~e~:~d5~~ ~'~"~~o!~ng~;"Exhibits ,t'~-'i /~4~-14; Scpt.2, Sept. 2. P. G. Ache. Cpl. P. G. Governor Ribo as Exhibit H. That respondents Isidro Magalla- 4. That petitioners Manuel Kangleo11, Alfredo Lucin, Felipe nes, Narciso Ravago, Bienvenido Gonzales, Constancio Acasio, Enelo and Luis Marte a.re veterans pursuant to Republic Act ~:~~E£:£:.:~~~~:'.:::~fa:::~:~~::~::~~~:~:~;~:; ~~~~: 2·~~~:::~~::~E;~::~El;3~if:Ji:~0;,~ ~, §;i'. story of the said court house, Court of First Instance, Maasin, ;~;,k:~dE~:!~i;t a~da~e :~~~ti~;1~~:~~~:io~:r::~.:i!:tB;~;e!-:~ Leyt:~ f~:~ ~:~~:~=~t:· a~i; ~~eJ;:1~:;rn!' dl:c~~ents: a.nd have not qualified in any civil service examination for the (a) Telegram by the Hon .. Secretary of Justice to Provih- classified civil service. cial Fiscal Lardizabal dated November 14, 1950, Ex- 5. That from the respective dates of petitioners' assumption hibit C; ~~d~~:~~. ~:dwi~:e termination of their services, as hereinbelow lb) The communication addressed by Governor Mamerto Name of Petitioner A8sumi•tion rumination S. Ribo to the Provincial Fiscal of Leyte, dated Nov- t. ·reodulo T. Ora; s S..vt. 2, 1949 Oct. 31. 1950 ember 2, 1950, Exhibit D; · -· Eula.Ho Berna.des Sept. z, 1949 Oct.. 31. 1960 le) Respondents also admit the communication addressed ~!. ·_•. ~fE1R~~o~~~:OVH ~f,t t m: Z~t g:: Iii~ by the Provincial Fiscal Jose 0. Lardizabal to the Ramon Kadavc ro Sept. Z, 1949 Oct. 31. 1950 Provincial Governor dated November 13, 1950, marked. ~ . g~cv~~eJ:.i~m Condos ~::L i; m; g~~: ~:: m~ (c.l)E;~~~\~~nsels in this stipulation of facts agreed ::,: ,t::_ ~!i:1~~it!~a:~~~~i: ~~!: ~: mi 8~t ~t mg that Teodulo Orais was appointed on September 1, . : [~1i:"'M~~~lo ~~~i: i: m; S~t ~~·. m3 1949 instead of September 1, 1950 in paragraph 1 of ~~~~~I ir.::~~ieon tg~: ~: m: 8~~: ~:: i:~g Exhibit E; the said petitioners have continuously performed the duties of (d) Communication addressed by Provincial Fiscal Lardi- their office regularly and without interruption; zabal fo petitioners Teodulo Orais dated November 3, 6. That the respondent Provincial Governor, Hon. Mamerto 1950, as Exhibit I; S. Ribo, ordered the services of each and everyone of the peti(el The communication addressed by Acting Provincial tioners terminated effective as of October 31, 1950; a.nd appoint. Warden Isidro P. Magallanes to petitioners herein ed in their stead the ~·espondent provincial guards who qualified dated December 7, 1950, Exhibit J; and assumed their 1·espective positions and discharged the duties (f) The telegram addressed by Fiscal Veloso to petition- as such provincial guards on the dates opposite their names up er Teodulo Orais dated November 29, 1950 as to present time as indicated below, to wit: Exhibit K; (2') The telegram addressed by the Auditor General to the Provincial Auditor, Tacloban, Leyte, dated November 1, 1950, Exhibit F. 9. That said respondents admit the genuine~ess and due execution but not the legality and conclusion of the following: Letter by the Commissioner of Civil Service Jose Gil addressed to Speaker Domingo Veloso dated February 15, 1951, Exhibit B, and the additional papers: Honorable Discharge of Alfredo Lucin, Exhibit B-1; Honorable Discharge of Felipe Enelo, Exhibit B-2; Honorable Discharge of Manuel Kangleon, Exhibit B-3; and Honorable Discharge of Luis Marte, Exhibit B-4. WHBREFORE, the parties to this Honurn.blc Court, most respectfully submit the foregoing stipulation of facts with the reservation to submit such additional evidencl' as each party deems necessary. Maasin, Leyte, April 12, 1951. The second reads thus - COME now the parties hereto duly assisted by their respective counsels and to this Honorable Court respectfully submit stipulation of facts, a.s follows: 1. That the parties, petitioners and respondents, arc residents of the Province of Leyte within the jurisdiction of this Court; 2. That the positions of provincial guard stationed in Maasin Provincial Jail, subject matter of this petition, were duly created by law; 3. That the petitioners were duly appointed members of th(' Provincial Guard Corps stationed at Maasin, Leyte, on the dates indicated after their respective names, and they duly qualified and assumed office, discharged their duties as such provincial guards on the dates hereinbelow indicated, to wit: D&lt of Au 1 iointmrnb Ass11mcd Uff kt 1. Oct. at. 1960 Nov. I, 1%0 2. Oct. 31 , 1950 Nm. l. 1950 3. Oct. 31. 1950 No\'. l. 19&0 4. Oct. 31. 1950 Nov. 1, 1\100 5 Crisanto Cab Oct. 31. 1950 Nov. I. l\IG'J 6. Dalm11cio Corte[ Od. 31. 1960 Nov. l, 1950 7. Rafael Galleon Od. 31. 1950 Nov. I, 111~(1 8 . Bienvenido Gonzales Oct. 31. 1960 Nm·. I. 1900 9 . Ji'ilomeno Adob11s Oct. 31, l!J60 Nov. I. 1%') :,~:. ~~:1~0nc~a~~i~:i0 8~t ~1: mz EE t mg ~ Arcadio Maglincs Oet. 31. 1950 Nov. I. 19~0 as shown by Exhibits 1, 2, 2(a), 3, 4, 4(a.), 5, 6, 6(a), 7, 7(a), 8, 8(a), 9, !Ha), 10, lO(a), 11, ll(a), 12, 12<a), 13, and 13(a); 7. That the petitioners declined or refused to vacate theit· respective positions as provincial guards at Maasin, Leyte, in favor of respondent provincial guards, notwithstanding the order of respondent Provincial Governor, Hon. Mamerto S. Ribo, terminating their services effe~tive as of October 31, 1950, and continued to hold their 1 ·espcctive positions until January 8, 1951, when they turned over their quarters and jail facilities io the respondent provincial guards; 8. That respondent Isidro Magallanes, a. civil service eligible, replaced petitioner Teodulo T. Orais, a non-eligible; respondent Pedro Flores, a civil service eligible, replaced petitioner David Lim, a non-eligible; respondent Francisco Tavera, a civil service eligible, replaced p~titioner Domingo Saligo, a non-eligible; respondent Narciso Ra.vago, a civil service eligible, replaced petitioner Eulalia Bernades, a non-eligible; respondent Crisanto Cab, a non-eligible, replaced petitioner Nicomedes Conej(IS, a non-eligile; i·espondent Dalmacio Corte!, a non-eligible, i·eplaced petitioner Ramon Kadavero, a non-eligible; respondent Rafael Ga.Heon, a non-eligible, replaced petitioner Vedasto Cabales, a non-eligible; respondent Bienvenido Gonzales, a non-eligible, replaced petitioner Felipe Enelo, a non-eligible; respondent Filomeno Adobas, a THE LAWYERS JOURNAL Fchrnary 28, Hl54 no11-digibl"'!, replaced petitione\· Meliton de Gracia., a non-eligible: pet.itioners Teo<lu1o T. Orais, David Lim, Domingo Sa.Ugo and Eulalio respondent J acinto Barro, a non-eiigible, replaced vetitioner Mar- - Bernades, respectively, who are not civil service eligibles. The rest garito Basuga, a non-eligible; 1·espondcnt Constancio Acasio, 11. of the resp~~dents, all not civil service eligibles, replaced the rest non-eligible, replaced petitioner Luis Marte, ~ non-eligible; res- of the petitioners, except Manuel Kangleon and Alfredo Lucin, po~dent Tereso Kaindoy, a non-eligible, replaced petitioner Do- who are also not civil service eligibles. Respondents Bienvenido minador Cordoves, a non-eligible; and respondent Al'cadio Magli- Gonzales and Constancio Acasio, not civil service eligibles, i·eplaced nes, a non-eligible, l'eplaced petitioner Teotimo Mullet, a non- Fdipe Enelo and Luis Marte who though not civil service eligibles eligible, as shown by Exhibits 1 to 13; are vetei-a.ns. 9. That since the aforesaid petitioners have been duly ap- Petitioners invoke in support of their clcim section 682 of the pointed and qualified and assumed the perfol'mance of their res- Rf:vised Adm'.nistra~ive Cod~, as amended by Com. Acts Nos. 177 pective offices up to the tim.? their services were ordered ter- ar.d 281. Said section P_rov1des: . . . . . minated effective as of October 31, 1950, they did not resign nor . Temporary a~po.1ntment w~t~out e~ammatl?n and cert1f1cah th b d "th f · d t · t d·s t1on by the Commissioner of Civil Service or his local represenave ey een re~o.ve . ei er or miscon ~c • mcompe ~cy, 1 - tative shall not be made to a competitive position in any case, loyalt! to the :hihppm~ G~vernment, neither have t. ey e~er except when the public interests so require, and then only upon comnutted any l~Tegular1ty m the performance o~ their duties the prior authoi·iza.tion of the Commissfoner of Civil Service; not· have they violated any law or duty or committed any act and any temporary appointment so authorized shall continue that may ca.use abandonment of their duties nor have they been only for such period not exceeding three months as may be investigated for cause. necessary to make appointment through certification of eligibies, 10. That until the present, the respondents, Governol', Trea- and in no case shall extend beyond thirty days from receipt surer and Guards, have refused and continue to refuse the peti- by the chief of the bureau or office of the Commissioner's certioners their 1·espective positions above mentioned and they have tification of eligibles; x x x. not been paid their salaries from the time of the termination of Appointments made under the section are tempo1·;u·y, when the their services or removal from theii· offices until the present; public interes.ts . so require. ~nd ou~y upon the prior authorization 11. That the respondent provincia.1 guards were paid their of t~e Comm1ss1:mcr of C1v1l Service,_ not to exceed thr~e months ~alaries as such provincial guards, the first sala~-y payme~t hav~~l~fmo;otl~:s~u~~::l~ e;~c~~fi:y~;d t~~ir~o~:~sf~·~~~ .• ~·e~~11~~f:t~~~ rn~ been made on December 26, 19~0, after their res~ec.tive ap- of eligibles. The fact that the petitioners held the positions for P~l~tment~ have been duly authorized by the Commiss~oner of more than thre(' months does not make them civil service eligible!!. Civil Service and apprOved by the Secretary of the Interior;_ Also the fact that the acting Commissioner of Civil Service authorized 12. Respondents and petitioners admit the authenticity and 'their ap11ointmcnts "under section 682 of the Revised Administrative due execution of Exhibits A, A-1 to A-14, R, B-1 to B-4, C, D, B, Code to continue only until replaced by an eligible" does not make F, G, H, T, J, K, L, L-1, L-2, L-3 of petit.ioners and of Exhibits them eligibles. 'l'he holding ot: .a position by a temporary appointee 1, l(a), l(b), 2, 2(a), 3, 4, 4ca), 4(b) , 4(c) , 4(d), 4(e), until replaced by an eligible in disregard of the time limitation of 4(f), 4{g), 5, 6, G<al, 7, 7(a), 8. 8(a), 9, 9(a). 10, lO C a), (1, three months is unauthol'ized and illegal. The temporary appointll(a), 12, 12(a), 13, 13(a), 14, 16, 16 (2 pages), 17 (2 pages), ment of ut~e~· non-eligibles to replace those whose term have expired 17(a), 17(b>, 17(c), 17 (d), 17(e), and 17(() for respondents. is. not pro~1b1ted~ ~ence the repl~cement of 'feodulo T. Orais,. I?avid respectively, without necessarily admitting their validity, legality Lm1, _Domingo Sahgo <llld Eulaho Bernade~, who a.re non-ehg1bl~s, nor the conclusions therein contained. by Js1d1"0 Magallan:s,. Pedr.o ~lores, F1~anc1sc? Tavera and Narciso WHEREFO~E, the part.ies to. this .Honorable Court most !:~~~f ;0hno-e~i1;ib~~:1:~es~o~-~::g~~~~r~:n1c:w;~~hu~~:~ a~~ep~~~a:~;; resp~ctfully submit .the forego1~g stipulati?~ of fac~ for approv- to section 682 of thf: Revised Administrative Code. The replacement al with the reservat10n to sumb1t such additional evidence as eacl1 of Felipe Enelo and Luis Marte, non-eligibles but veteran&, by party may deem necessa.17. Bienvenido Gonzales and Constancio Acasio, who are non-eligibles, M.i.asin, Leyte, April 12, 1951. is unlawful The former are preferred under Rep. Act No. 65, as Upon the above quoted stipulations of facts, the Court of First amended by Rep. Act No. 154, they have. been appointed within the Instance of Leyte rendered judgment, the dispositive part of Wrm provided for in said Republic Acts. If the preference of a which is, v«teran is to be confined to appointment and promotion only ':lnd ta) Declara<lo a los recurrentes Teodulo Orais, Eulalio Bernades, Dominador Cadavero, David Lim, Nicomedes Conejos, Vedast:i Cabales, Meliton de Gracia, y Margarito Basuga sin dereclio <1. los cargos de sargento de la guardia provincial y guardias provinciales ocupados pol' los recurridos Isidro Magallanes, Pedt·o Flo1·es, Francisco Tavera, Narciso Ravago, Crisanto Cab, Dalmacio Corte!, Rafael Galleon, Filomeno Adobas, Jacinto Barro. Tereso Caindoy y Arcadio Maglines, y sobreseyendo su accion. Cb) DeclarandO a los recurrentes Felipe Enelo y Luis Marte con derecho de continuar en sus cargos como guardias provinciales y que los nombramientos extendidos a favor de los i·ecurridos Bienvenido Gonzales y Constancio Acasio son contrnrios a la lay, y ordenando a estos dos ultimas que entreguen sus puestos a los refcridos recurrentes Felipe Enelo y Luis Ma.rte. (c) Ordenando al tesorero provincial Sr. Melecio Palma, o a su sucesol· que pague los sueldos de los recurrentes Felipe Enelo y Luis Marte desde el primero de Noviembre de 1950 y mientras dichos recurrentes continuen desempciiando sus cargos legalmentc. <dl Sobreseyendo la accion de los recunrntes Manuel Kangleon y Alfredo Lucin. Ce) Absolviendo libremente de la demanda a los l'ecurridos Mamerto S. Ribo y Francisco P. Lopez; y (f) Condenando a los recurrentes, excepcion de Felipe Enelo y Luis Marte, a. pagar las costas de! juicio. From this judgment the 1 ietitioners, with the exception of Fe.lipc Enelo and Luis Marte, appealed. Re~pondents Bienvenido Gonzales and Conotancio Acasion appe?.led fr.::>m the decision in so far as the trial court found them not entitled to the positions claimed by them. The respondents Isidro Magallanes, Pedro Flores, Fnmcisco 'favera and Narciso Ravago, all civil sen·icc eligibles, replaced the does not include the right to continue to hold the position to which he was appointed until an eligible is certified by the Commissioner of Civil Service, then he would be in no better situation than a noneligible who is not a veteran. The appointment of a veteran, however, is subject to cancellation or his removal from office or employment must be made by competent authority when the Commissioner of Civil certifies that there is an eligible. There is no a.verment in the petition that the positions held by Manuel Kangleon and Alfredo Lucin were usurped or that they were replaced.by others in their positions as provincial guards. Hence the petition in so far as it concerns them must be dismissed. Republic Act Ko. 5!i7 is also invoked by the appellants Bienvenido Gonw.les and Constancio Acasio. The net guarantees the tenure of office of provincial guards and members of cit~· and municipal police who are eligibles. Non-eligibles like the two appellants do not come under the protection of the act invoked by them. The judgment appealed from is affirmed, without cosl;;;. Paras, Benyzon, Montemayor, Jugo, Pablo, Tuazou, Reyes, Bau. tisto., Angelo and L<ibrador, J. J., concur. VI The Leyte-Samar Sales Co. and Uaymond Tomas;;i, versus Sulp1'cio V. Cea, in his capacity as Judge of the Coit·rt of Pirst Instance of Leyl.;,; and Atty. Olegario Lastrilla, G. R. Nu. 1 .--5063, May 20, 1953. CIVIL PlWCEDURi'J; EXECUTlON; WHERE PROPBH'TY SOLD AT PUBLIC AUCTION IS CLAIMED BY '!'HIRD .PERSON.Jn a suit for damages by S Co. and RT a.'!'ainst L Co., AH FB and JR, judgment against defendants, jointly and s1:verally, for the amount of !'31,589.14 ,,·as rendered. On June 9, 1951 the February 28, 19!J4 THE LAWYEHS JOUHNAL

Date

1954

Rights