This case has been cited 2 times or more.
|
2009-04-29 |
PERALTA, J. |
||||
| We begin with the precept, firmly established by law and jurisprudence, that a permanent appointment in the civil service is issued to a person who has met the requirements of the position to which the appointment is made in accordance with law and the rules issued pursuant thereto.[28] An appointment is permanent where the appointee meets all the requirements for the position to which he is being appointed, including the appropriate eligibility prescribed, and it is temporary where the appointee meets all the requirements for the position except only the appropriate civil service eligibility.[29] | |||||
|
2009-04-02 |
TINGA, J. |
||||
| Petitioner also cites Caringal v. Philippine Charity Sweepstakes Office (PCSO)[28] and Erasmo v. Home Insurance Guaranty Corporation[29] to show that a presidential appointment is not required before a position in a government corporation is classified as included in the CES. [30] We are not convinced. | |||||