Question Issuance of reassignment order without authority

In the case of Rubio, Marina A., Re: Reassignment (CSC Resolution No. 000270, Promulgated on January 27, 2000), the Commission ruled that reassignment of employees is a management prerogative of the appointing authority, thus, vesting the power to reassign is a necessary adjunct of the power to appoint. Logically, the City Agriculturist, not being the appointing authority concerned, has no power to reassign.

Furthermore, The Civil Service Commission 2017 Omnibus Rules on Appointment and Other Human Resource Actions (Revised July 2018) is explicit who has the discretionary power and authority to issue reassignment orders. Section 13 thereof says,

Section 13. Other Human Resource Actions. The following human resource actions which will not require the issuance of appointment shall nevertheless require an Office Order issued by the Appointing Officer/Authority.

a. Reassignment
b. Detail
c. Designation

Whereas, Section 77 of the Local Government Code provides that the local chief executive (Municipal/City Mayor) of every local government unit shall be responsible for human resources development in his unit and shall take all personnel action (appointment, promotion, transfer, reinstatement, re-employment, detail, reassignment, demotion, and separation) in accordance with the constitutional provisions on civil service.

Given the abovementioned CSC Resolution, ORAOHRA and Local Government Code, it clearly states that only the mayor may reassign employee in an LGU. If the OIC in the LGU reassign his employee to other department within the same LGU but without the approval of the mayor, will the OIC be liable for usurpation of official function which is tantamount to grave misconduct? (I know that the reassignment order is void ab initio but I am not sure if the OIC is administratively liable for usurpation)

Thank you in advance for the reply.

Good day Sir/Madam:

Please be informed that as a matter of policy, this Office refrains from rendering categorical opinions on matters and issues that may later be a subject of an administrative proceeding before the Commission either via an appeal or a complaint. This is to preclude the possibility of prejudgment should an actual administrative case be commenced or instituted based on the said matters or issues.

Anent your query, we invite your attention to Section 13 (c) par. 3, Rule IV of the Omnibus Rules on Appointments and Other Human Resource Actions (ORAOHRA), which provides that:

“Officials designated as Officer-in-Charge (OIC) enjoy limited powers which are confined to functions of administration and ensuring that the office continues its usual activities. The OIC may not be deemed to possess the power to appoint employees as the same involves the exercise of discretion which is beyond the power of an OIC, unless the designation order issued by the proper appointing officer/authority expressly includes the power to issue appointment.”

In this case, if the designation of the OIC expressly includes the power to issue appointment, then the latter may not be held liable for usurpation of official function or grave misconduct, for that matter.

We hope that we were able to answer your query.

Once again big thanks to all CSC Action Officers appreciated all the advise and assistance you have given us.
Stay well and safe.