Career Opportunities

FACTS: Petitioner Agustina M. Enemecio (Enemecio”) is a utility worker at the Cebu State College of Science and Technology, College of Fisheries Technology (CSCST-CFT”), Carmen, Cebu. The permanent status of private respondent’s appointment as Executive Assistant II was recognized and attested to by the Civil Service Commission Regional Office No. 12. Petitioner’s submission that private respondent’s ad interim appointment is synonymous with a temporary appointment which could be validly terminated at any time is clearly untenable.administrative law

For the proper management of said critical project or area, the President may by his proclamation reorganize such government offices, agencies, institutions, corporations or instrumentalities including the re-alignment of government personnel, and their specific functions and responsibilities.

Petitioner likewise pointed out that the charge against him was the subject of similar cases filed before the Ombudsman. VIII of the Constitution provides: The Members of the Supreme Court and of other courts established by law shall not be designated to any agency performing quasi-judicial or administrative functions.

Petitioner, Patricio Dumlao, is a former Governor of Nueva Vizcaya, who has filed his certificate of candidacy for said position of Governor in the forthcoming elections of January 30, 1980. Enemecio filed an administrative complaint for gross misconduct, …

Career Opportunities

Facts: Petitioner filed a complaint for libel against respondents. A fortiori, the decision or award of the voluntary arbitrator or panel of arbitrators should likewise be appealable to the CA, in line with the procedure outlined in Revised Administrative Circular No. 1-95, just like those of the quasi-judicial agencies, boards and commissions enumerated therein.

The petitioner filed a petition for certiorari under Rule 65 of the Rules of Court instead of a petition for review under Rule 43 of the said Rules because he realized that the period within which to file the said petition for review had lapsed, and that AO No. 95 of the President had become final and executory.administrative law

As correctly found by the Court of Appeals, petitioners in asserting the non- necessity for a prior consent interprets the first sentence of paragraph 7 of Contract A” to refer to an assignment of lease under Article 1649 of the Civil Code and not to a mere sublease.

Some critics may say PGAD is not recognized” as a disability by the Social Security Administration, so they needed to follow the law,” or follow regulations.” As I will show you in a later post, it doesn’t take a rocket …