Back

Evelio B. Javier, et al. Vs. Court of Appeals, et al.

EVELIO B. JAVIER, RIZAL G. PAGTANAC, JOVITO C. PLAMERAS, JR., SILVESTRE E. UNTARAN, JR. and ALFONSO V. COMBONG, JR., petitioners, vs. HON. COURT OF APPEALS, MAXIMIANO SENTINA, JUANITO BULAC, FRED PALLON, AMADO YANGSON, ANGEL MARTINEZ, DIONISIO NOMBREHERMOSO, MANUEL RIVERO, JR., FEDERICO RUIZ, JR., MELQUIADES GALIDO, AGUSTIN ALMOROS, GENEROSO BARSUBIA, FELOMINO CABREJAS, FORTUNATO CADIAO, FERNANDO CONDES, MARCELINO DE LA CRUZ, PELAGIO JUADA, FRANCISCO JUBILAN, RODOLFO SIASOL, EPE MACABANTI, ERNESTO GRASPARIL, EUSTAQUIO MENA, DIONISIO JAVIER, PETRONILO BERGANTINOS, FRANCISCO ABANTO, FELIMON ABLE, CORAZON HABLADO, JOSE ADUG, SILVESTRE ELLO, ESTEBAN MANINGO, ELEUTERIO PLAMERAS, FELIPE DE LOS REYES, GONZALO VELASCO, TEODULFO NARANJO, ALFREDO BACAWAG, JOSE CEPE, ENRIQUE JOSILVA, PEDRO QUANICO, PELAGIO ESPARAR, CRISANTO GELLA, RODULFO GUMANAO and CRISANTO MEJUGE, respondents, ENRIQUE A. ZALDIVAR, intervenor.

G.R. No. L-49065 | 1994-06-01

D E C I S I O N


VITUG, J.:

The issues raised in this petition for review on certiorari revolve around the validity of Resolution No. 206 of the Provincial Board of Antique abolishing the Office of the Provincial Engineer.

On 19 April 1974, Provincial Engineer Maximiano Sentina and forty (40) officials and employees of the Office of the Provincial Engineer filed a petition for mandamus and damages against the entire Provincial Board of Antique. The petition was anchored on the hypothesis that the abolition of the Office of the Provincial Engineer was a circumvention of the constitutional mandate on security of tenure and intended only...