REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES

CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION

CONSTITUTION HILLS, BATASAN PAMBANSA COMPLEX
DILIMAN, QUEZON CITY

MENCHITA F. CELESTRA,
Complainant-Appellant,
Admin. Complaint No. ____________
For: Violation of Sec. 6 (c) and Sec.32
(d) of R.A. 7305 (Magna Carta of
-versus- Public Health Workers) and
Violation of Sec. 13 (a) (3) of the 2017
CSC Omnibus Rules on
Appointments and other Human
Resource Actions
RAUL S. PALINO ,
Respondent-Appellee.
x----------------------------------x

APPEAL MEMORANDUM

PARTIES

1. Complainant-appellant is MENCHITA F. CELESTRA is the incumbent

Municipal Health Officer with residence address at 323 F. Raymundo St.,
Lagundi, Morong, Rizal. She can be served with orders, notices and
processes of this Honorable Court at the address of undersigned
counsel indicated below.

2. Respondent-appellee RAUL S. PALINO is the incumbent Municipal

Mayor of the municipality of Teresa, Province of Rizal and can be
served with orders, notices and processes of this Honorable Court at
the said address.

NATURE AND TIMELINESS OF THE APPEAL

3. This is an appeal from the letter-order dated September 6, 2019 1

issued by respondent-appellee, wherein he ordered
complainant-appellant to report for duty at the barangay health center
of barangay May-iba allegedly “pending the resolution of
(complainant-appellant’s) present administrative cases” which is an
illegal and invalid reassignment in violation of Sec. 6 (c) and Sec. 32 (d)
of R.A. 7305 (Magna Carta of Public Health Workers).

4. The undersigned counsel is filing the instant appeal based on Sec. 6 (c)
of R.A. 7305 which gives complainant the right to appeal from the
said reassignment.

5. Under Sec. 66, Rule 13 (Appeal in Disciplinary Cases) of the 2017

Revised Rules on Administrative Cases in the Civil Service (RRACCS),

1
Original copy of which is attached herewith as Annex “A”,
 appeals to this Honorable Office must be filed within fifteen (15) days
from receipt of the disciplinary order. Complainant received the
aforesaid Letter-Order on September 9, 2019. Hence, the deadline for
submission of the appeal memorandum September 24, 2019. This
petition is thus timely filed.

STATEMENT OF FACTS

1. On September 4, 2019, respondent-appellee issued a Memorandum2 in

reply to complainant-appellant’s letter on even date asking for her
automatic reinstatement after serving out her 60-day preventive
suspension. The said Memorandum alleged that
complainant-appellant’s 60 day of preventive suspension fell on
th

September 8, 2019 and advised her to check with the Municipality’s

Human Resource Office on Monday, September 9, 2019 regarding the
respondent-appellee’s response and/or decision on
complainant-appellant’s letter asking for her automatic reinstatement.

2. On September 9, 2019, complainant-appellant reported for work at her

office located at the Municipal Hall, she was flabbergasted when she
received the assailed Memorandum dated Sept. 6, 2019 which ordered
her to report for work at the barangay health center of barangay
May-iba which is completely independent and different from her
specifically designated office at the Office of the Municipal Health
Officer, Teresa, Rizal as per her original appointment letter3.

3. Complainant-appellant, while reporting for work at the said barangay

health station, vehemently disagrees with the said order and deems the
same illegal and invalid for being contrary to law.

4. Respondent-appellee’s grossly abusive, arbitrary, despotic and

whimsical exercise of his appointing/disciplining power and authority
is also a violation the 2017 Omnibus Rules on Appointments and other
Human Resource Actions which were revised by this Honorable
Commission in July 2018 and which are supposed to be applied
suppletorily to the Magna Carta of Public Health Workers.

5. Hence, this Appeal.

ISSUE

WHETHER OR NOT RESPONDENT-APPELLEE’S ORDER

REASSIGNING COMPLAINANT-APPELLANT TO A BARANGAY
HEALTH STATION IN BARANGAY MAY-IBA AS CONTAINED IN
HIS MEMORANDUM DATED SEPTEMBER 6, 2019 VIOLATES SEC.
6 (C) AND SEC. 32 (D) OF R.A. 7305 (MAGNA CARTA OF PUBLIC
HEALTH WORKERS) AND SEC. 13 (A) (3) OF THE 2017 OMNIBUS
RULES ON APPOINTMENTS AND OTHER HUMAN RESOURCE
ACTIONS ISSUED BY THIS HONORABLE COMMISSION.

ARGUMENTS/DISCUSSION

2
Original copy of which is attached herewith as Annex “B”
3
Colored photocopy of the original copy of complainant-appellant’s appointment is attached herewith as
Annex “C”.
1. Respondent-appellee’s assailed Order clearly and unequivocally
constitutes a glaring violation of Sec. 6 (c) of R.A. 7305, viz:
“SEC. 6. Transfer or Geographical Reassignment of Public health
Workers.

(a) a transfer is a movement from one position to another which is of

equivalent rank, level or salary without break in service;

(b) a geographical reassignment, hereinafter referred to as

"reassignment," is a movement from one geographical location
to another; and

(c) a public health worker shall not be transferred and/or

reassigned, except when made in the interest of public service, in
which case, the employee concerned shall be informed of the
reasons therefore in writing. If the public health worker believes
that there is no justification for the transfer and/or reassignment,
he/she may appeal his/her case to the Civil Service Commission,
which shall cause his/her reassignment to be held in abeyance;
Provided, That no transfer and/or reassignment whatsoever shall be
made three (3) months before any local or national elections: Provided,
further, That the necessary expenses of the transfer and/or
reassignment of the public health worker and his/her immediate family
shall be paid for the Government.”(emphasis ours)

Based on the foregoing express and clear provisions of the law

covering complainant-appellant herein, she cannot be transferred
and/or reassigned, except when in the interest of public service, in
which case, she should have been informed of the reasons therefore in
writing. In the instant case, there is no showing that
complainant-appellant was being reassigned in the interest of
public service. Moreover, the assailed Memorandum did not even
contain the reasons why she was being reassigned which evinces
respondent-appellee’s whimsical and arbitrary exercise of his
appointing/disciplining power.

2. The same illegal reassignment likewise is a violation of Sec. 32 (d) of

the said R.A. 7305, to wit:

“SEC. 32. Freedom from Interference or Coercion. - It shall be

unlawful for any person to commit any of the following acts of
interference or coercion:

(a) to require as a condition of employment that a public health

worker shall not join a health workers’ organization or union or shall
relinquish membership therein;

(b) to discriminate in regard to hiring or tenure of employment or

any item or condition of employment in order to encourage or
discourage membership in any health workers’ organization or union;

(c) to prevent a health worker from carrying out duties laid upon
him/her by his/her position in the organization or union, or to penalize
him/her for the action undertaken in such capacity;
 (d) to harass or interfere with the discharge of the functions of
the health worker when these are calculated to intimidate or to
prevent the performance of his/her duties and responsibilities; and
(e) to otherwise interfere in the establishment, functioning, or
administration of health workers organization or unions through acts
designed to place such organization or union under the control of
government authority. (emphasis ours)

Likewise, the aforesaid act of arbitrarily reassigning

complainant-appellant is clearly a form of harassment or interference
which is designed to intimidate or prevent her from performing her
duties and responsibilities as a direct offshoot of the administrative and
criminal cases filed by complainant-appellant against
respondent-appellee herein. This illegal and vindictive act of
respondent-appellee is a clear violation of the protection afforded
complainant-appellant under Sec. 32 (d) of R.A. 7305.

3. Aside from the fact the reassignment of complainant-appellant herein

violated Secs. 6 (c) and 32 (d) of the Magna Carta of Public Health
Workers for not having been made in the interest of public service (in
fact the same was made without rhyme or reason) and only calculated
to intimidate complainant-appellant herein, the same may be
considered as “constructive dismissal” under Sec. 13 (a) (3) of the
2017 Omnibus Rules on Appointments and other Human Resource
Actions (Revised July 2018) issued and adopted by this Honorable
Commission, the relevant portion of which provide that :

“Reassignment that constitutes constructive dismissal may be any of the

following:

i. Reassignment of an employee to perform duties and

responsibilities inconsistent with the duties and responsibilities
of his/her position such as from a position of dignity to a more
servile or menial job;

ii. Reassignment to an office not in the existing organizational

structure.

iii. Reassignment to an existing office but the employee is not given any
definite set of duties and responsibilities.

iv. Reassignment that will cause significant financial dislocation or will

cause difficulty or hardship on the part of an employee because of
geographic location; or

v. Reassignment that is done indiscriminately or whimsically

because the law is not intended as a convenient shield for the
appointing/disciplining officer to harass or oppress a
subordinate on the pretext of advancing and promoting public
interest such as reassignment of career service officials and
employees with valid appointments during change of
administration of elective and appointive officials.

In the instant case, complainant-appellant was reassigned to a

barangay health station with duties and responsibilities which
 are inconsistent with her previous duties and responsibilities
which carried a position of dignity to a more servile or menial
job – clearly an act intended to humiliate or demean
complainant-appellant herein for having the guts to fight
respondent-appellee.

It was also a reassignment to an office which is not in the

existing organizational structure since the barangay is clearly a
different local government unit with a different organizational
structure.

Lastly, the reassignment was done whimsically, arbitrarily and

despotically without rhyme or reason with a clear motive—to
harass, oppress and intimidate complainant-appellant-- in
obvious retaliation for the administrative and criminal cases
which she filed against respondent-appellee.

4. Under Sec. 13 (a) (4), the remedy for the employee who feels
aggrieved by the reassignment order is to appeal the same within 15
days upon receipt thereof to the Commission or CSC-RO with
jurisdiction, as provided under specific law, if he/she believes there is
no justification for the reassignment. Pending appeal, the
reassignment shall not be executory.4 The Decision of the CSC RO
may be further appealed to the Commission within 15 days from receipt
thereof.

5. Finally, Sec. 13 (a) (5) expressly states that reassignment of public

health workers, public social workers, public school teachers and all
other professions covered by special laws shall be governed by their
respective laws. However, the rules herein mentioned shall be
applied suppletorily.

PRAYER

WHEREFORE, based on the foregoing, it is respectfully prayed that

this Honorable Commission CANCEL, REVERSE and NULLIFY the
Memorandum Order dated September 6, 2019 issued by
respondent-appellee herein and that another one be issued ORDERING
that complainant-appellant be immediately reinstated to her previous
position and office as Municipal Health Officer.

Petitioner further prays for such other relief as the Honorable Court
may deem just and equitable under the premises.

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED

Quezon City

September 19, 2019

ATTY. NONNATUS P. CHUA

Counsel for the Complainant-Appellant

4
CSC vs. Pacheo, G.R. No. 178021, January 25, 2012
 Rm. 406, S. Medalla Bldg.
EDSA cor. Gen. MacArthur St.,
Araneta Center, Cubao, Quezon City
PTR No. 7785304/ 07-19-2019 / Makati City
IBP Lifetime Roll No. 012419 /O.R. no. 961392
Date of Enrollment 1-28-2014
Roll of Attorneys No. 35618
MCLE Compliance No. V-0013279/3-11-2016
Telephone: 09478208607/09273696101
EMAIL: nonnatuschua@yahoo.com

VERIFICATION & CERTIFICATION

OF NON-FORUM SHOPPING

I, MENCHITA F. CELESTRA, Filipino, of legal age, married and with

residence address at 323 F. Raymundo St., Lagundi, Morong, Rizal, after being
duly sworn in to accordance with law, hereby depose and say:

1. That I am the complainant-appellant in the above-entitled case;

2. That I have caused the preparation and filing of the instant Appeal
Memorandum;

3. That I have read this Appeal Memorandum and confirm that the
allegations stated herein are true and correct based on my own
personal knowledge and based on authentic records in my possession;

4. That I hereby certify that I have not commenced any action or

proceeding involving the issues covered by this Appeal Memorandum
before the Supreme Court, the Court of Appeals, the Court of Tax
Appeals, or any other judicial tribunal;

5. That to the best of my knowledge, no action or proceeding which

involves the issues covered by this Appeal Memorandum is pending
before the Supreme Court, the Court of Appeals, the Court of Tax
Appeals, or any other judicial tribunal;

6. That should I gain knowledge that any such action or proceeding is

either pending or has been terminated, I shall report such fact to this
Honorable Office within five (5) days from the date that I obtain
knowledge thereof.

MENCHITA F. CELESTRA
Affiant

SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this ___ day of __________ in

________________ by the Affiant whose identity I have confirmed through her
Identification Number____________________.

Doc No.____
Page No. ___
Book No. ___
Series of _____.