ADMINISTRATIVE LAW | RODRIGO VS. SANDIGANBAYAN, G.R. No. 125498, JULY 2, 1999

RODRIGO VS. SANDIGANBAYAN,

G.R. No. 125498, JULY 2, 1999

 

TOPIC/DOCTRINE

What Congress delegated to the DBM is the administration of the Compensatory and Position Classification System and not the determination of the jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan.

 

FACTS

Petitioner mayor’s position having been classified as Grade 27 in accordance with R.A. No. 6758, and having been charged with violation of Section 3 (e) of R.A. No. 3019, petitioner is subject to the jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan, as defined by Section 4 a. of P.D. No. 1606, as amended by Section 2 of R.A. No. 7975. By virtue of the same Section 4 a., as amended, his co-accused are also subject to the Anti-Graft Court's jurisdiction.

Petitioners now move for a reconsideration of our decision, contending that the authority of the DBM was limited to the “preparation” of the Index of Occupational Services, Position Titles and Salary Grades. A new law adopting said Index, petitioners argue, is required for such Index to have the force of law. It is also alleged that the authority conferred upon the DBM constitutes an undue delegation of legislative powers resulting in the executive branch, through the DBM, determining the jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan.

 

ISSUE

Whether there was undue delegation of power.

 

RULING

No.

The court noted that while Section 4 a. of P.D. No. 1606, as amended, did not expressly include the position of Municipal Mayor as among those within the Sandiganbayan’s exclusive and original jurisdiction, such position is embraced in the catch-all provision, Section 4 a. (5).

Here, the court ruled that Section 444 (d) of the Local Government Code is confirmatory of the Salary Grade assigned by the DBM to Municipal Mayors and should thus lay the matter of the Sandiganbayan jurisdiction over petitioner Mayor to rest. It must be clarified that what Congress delegated to the DBM is the administration of the Compensation and Position Classification System, and, with it the, assignment of Salary Grades—not the determination of the jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan. When the DBM assigns a position a certain Salary Grade, it does so pursuant to its authority under R.A. No. 6758. That by such allocation the official comes under the exclusive and original jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan is only incidental to the exercise of such authority.







Popular posts from this blog

CRIMINAL LAW II CASE DIGEST/ BACLAYON V. MUTIA, 129 SCRA 148

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW I CASE DIGEST | THE DIOCESE OF BACOLOD V. COMELEC G.R. No. 205728, January 21, 2015

CREDIT TRANSACTIONS CASE DIGEST/ BPI FAMILY BANK VS. FRANCO/ G. R. NO. 123498/ 23 NOVEMBER 2007

REMEDIAL LAW | Riviera Golf Club v. CCA G.R. No. 173783, June 17 2015

CREDIT TRANSACTION CASE DIGEST/ MINA VS. PASCUAL/ 25 PHIL. 540 (1923)

CREDIT TRANSACTION CASE DIGEST/ QUINTOS VS. BECK/ 69 PHIL. 108 (1939)

LAW ON PROPERTY | ACOSTA V. OCHOA, ET AL., G.R. NO. 211559; G.R. NO. 215634, OCTOBER 15, 2019

ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION | HYGIENIC PACKAGING CORPORATION VS. NUTRI-ASIA, INC ., G.R. NO. 201302, JANUARY 23, 2019

LEGAL ETHICS | MAURICIO C. ULEP VS. THE LEGAL CLINIC, INC Bar Matter No. 553. June 17, 1993

CREDIT TRANSACTION CASE DIGEST/ DELOS SANTOS VS. JARRA/ G. R. NO. L-4150/ 10 FEBRUARY 1910/ 15 PHIL. 147