Altres vs. Empleo

A certification of availability of funds required for purposes other than the actual payment of an obligation—such as the approval of appointments in a local government unit—is issued by the city accountant under Section 474(b)(4) of the Local Government Code of 1991, not the city treasurer under Section 344.

In July 2003, then Iligan City Mayor Franklin M. Quijano announced numerous vacant career positions in the city government. Petitioners and other applicants submitted their applications. Toward the end of his term, on May 27, June 1, and June 24, 2004, Mayor Quijano issued appointments to petitioners. The Sangguniang Panglungsod subsequently issued resolutions directing the City Human Resource Management Office to hold the transmission of the mayor's appointments to ascertain whether they were hurriedly prepared "midnight appointments," and requesting the CSC to suspend action on processing appointments until a new budget was enacted. Respondent City Accountant Camilo G. Empleo refused to issue the certification of availability of funds, and other respondents refused to sign position description forms, citing the Sangguniang Panglungsod resolutions.

• Nature of the Action: Petitioners sought a writ of mandamus to compel respondent City Accountant Empleo to issue a certification of availability of funds, and other respondents to sign position description forms, in connection with their appointments issued by then Mayor Quijano.
• The Appointments: Petitioners applied for vacant career positions in the Iligan City government. Mayor Quijano issued appointments to petitioners near the end of his term on May 27, June 1, and June 24, 2004.
• Sangguniang Panglungsod Resolutions: The Sangguniang Panglungsod issued Resolution No. 04-242, requesting the suspension of action on appointments until a new budget was enacted, and Resolution No. 04-266, directing the City Human Resource Management Office to hold the transmission of the mayor's appointments to investigate whether they were "midnight appointments."
• Refusal to Certify: Relying on the Sangguniang Panglungsod resolutions, respondent City Accountant Empleo refused to issue the certification of availability of funds, and other respondents refused to sign the position description forms.
• CSC Disapproval: The CSC Field Office disapproved the appointments due to lack of certification of availability of funds. The CSC Regional Office dismissed the subsequent appeal, holding that without the required certification, the appointment must be disapproved.

• Applicable Provision on Certification: Petitioner argued that Section 474(b)(4) of the Local Government Code applies, making it the ministerial duty of the city accountant—not the city treasurer under Section 344—to issue the certification of availability of funds.
• Substantial Compliance: Petitioner maintained that the verification and certification against forum shopping signed by only 11 out of 59 petitioners constituted substantial compliance, as the other petitioners could no longer be contacted or were no longer interested in pursuing the case.
• Mootness and Legislative Intervention: Petitioner argued that the case was not moot, asserting that the refusal to certify unduly interfered with the mayor's appointing power, the Sangguniang Panglungsod resolutions constituted legislative intervention, and the prohibition against midnight appointments applies only to presidential appointments.

• Procedural Defects: Respondent countered that the petition was defective because the verification and certification against forum shopping were signed by only 11 out of 59 petitioners, and no competent evidence of identity was presented, warranting dismissal under Section 5, Rule 7 and Section 5, Rule 45 of the Rules of Court.
• Question of Fact: Respondent argued that petitioners raised questions of fact—specifically, whether salaries were being sought and whether the city accountant could be compelled under the circumstances—which are improper in a petition for review on certiorari.
• Mootness: Respondent asserted that the case had become moot and academic because the CSC had already disapproved the appointments.

• Verification and Forum Shopping: Whether the petition should be dismissed for defective verification and certification against forum shopping signed by only 11 out of 59 petitioners.
• Question of Law vs. Fact: Whether the petition raises a question of law proper for a petition for review on certiorari.
• Mootness: Whether the case is moot and academic given the CSC's final disapproval of the appointments.
• Certification of Availability of Funds: Whether Section 474(b)(4) or Section 344 of the Local Government Code of 1991 applies to the requirement of certification of availability of funds under Section 1(e)(ii), Rule V of CSC Memorandum Circular Number 40, Series of 1998.

• Verification and Forum Shopping: The petition was not dismissed. Substantial compliance was applied. The 11 signatories were unquestionably real parties-in-interest with sufficient knowledge to swear to the truth of the allegations. The failure of the other petitioners to sign due to loss of contact or lack of interest justified the relaxation of the rules to serve the ends of justice. The non-signing petitioners were dropped as parties to the case.
• Question of Law vs. Fact: A question of law was properly raised. The issue required the determination of which provision of the Local Government Code applies to the CSC requirement, not an examination of the probative value of evidence. When there is no dispute as to fact, whether the conclusion drawn therefrom is correct constitutes a question of law.
• Mootness: The case was rendered moot by the CSC's final disapproval of the appointments. However, the merits were resolved because the contested action is capable of repetition.
• Certification of Availability of Funds: Section 474(b)(4) applies, not Section 344. Section 344 governs actual disbursements of money from the local treasury through the certification and approval of vouchers for services already rendered or expenses incurred. At the time the certification was required, the appointments were not yet approved and no services had been rendered; thus, there was no due and demandable obligation. Section 474(b)(4) mandates the city accountant to certify the availability of budgetary allotment to which expenditures and obligations may be properly charged, which necessarily includes the duty to certify the availability of funds for the payment of salaries of appointees to positions in the plantilla prior to CSC approval.

• Substantial Compliance with Verification and Certification Against Forum Shopping — A distinction exists between non-compliance with verification and non-compliance with certification against forum shopping. Defective verification does not render a pleading fatally defective if strict compliance may be dispensed with to serve the ends of justice; it is deemed substantially complied with when one with ample knowledge signs it in good faith. Defective certification against forum shopping is generally not curable unless there are "special circumstances or compelling reasons" justifying substantial compliance. The certification must be signed by all petitioners; otherwise, those who do not sign are dropped as parties. However, when petitioners share a common interest and invoke a common cause of action, the signature of only one substantially complies with the rule.
• Question of Law vs. Question of Fact — A question of law exists when the doubt or controversy concerns the correct application of law or jurisprudence to a certain set of facts, or when the issue does not call for an examination of the probative value of the evidence. A question of fact exists when the doubt arises as to the truth or falsehood of facts, or when the query invites calibration of the whole evidence.
• Exception to the Mootness Doctrine (Capable of Repetition) — A case may be resolved on its merits despite being rendered moot and academic when the contested action is capable of repetition or susceptible of recurrence.
• Certification of Availability of Funds by LGU Accountant — Under Section 474(b)(4) of the Local Government Code of 1991, the city accountant has the ministerial duty to certify the availability of budgetary allotment to which expenditures and obligations may be properly charged. This includes the certification of availability of funds for the payment of salaries of appointees to plantilla positions prior to CSC approval. Section 344, which requires the city treasurer to certify the availability of funds, applies exclusively to actual disbursements for due and demandable obligations.

• "Whenever a certification as to availability of funds is required for purposes other than actual payment of an obligation which requires disbursement of money, Section 474(b)(4) of the Local Government Code of 1991 applies, and it is the ministerial duty of the city accountant to issue the certification."
• "The certification against forum shopping must be signed by all the plaintiffs or petitioners in a case; otherwise, those who did not sign will be dropped as parties to the case. Under reasonable or justifiable circumstances, however, as when all the plaintiffs or petitioners share a common interest and invoke a common cause of action or defense, the signature of only one of them in the certification against forum shopping substantially complies with the Rule."
• "Section 344 of the Local Government Code of 1991 thus applies only when there is already an obligation to pay on the part of the local government unit, precisely because vouchers are issued only when services have been performed or expenses incurred."

• Docena v. Lapesura — Cited by respondents for the rule that all petitioners must sign the certification against forum shopping. Distinguished/applied, as the Court noted that Docena itself sustained substantial compliance where petitioners shared a common interest (e.g., husband and wife involving conjugal property).
• Iglesia ni Cristo v. Ponferrada — Followed. Cited for the rule that substantial compliance with verification and certification against forum shopping is allowed under justifiable circumstances, such as when petitioners share a common interest in the subject matter.
• Tan, et al. v. Ballena, et al. — Followed. Cited for the proposition that excusing a technical lapse to afford a review of the case better serves the ends of justice than disposing of the case on technicality.
• David v. Arroyo; Public Interest Center, Inc. v. Elma; Manalo v. Calderon — Followed. Cited as basis for resolving the merits of a moot case because the contested actions were capable of repetition.

• Section 1(e)(ii), Rule V, CSC Memorandum Circular No. 40, Series of 1998 — Requires that appointments in local government units be accompanied by a certification by the Municipal/City Provincial Accountant/Budget Officer that funds are available. Applied as the procedural rule that triggered the necessity for the certification in question.
• Section 474(b)(4), Republic Act No. 7160 (Local Government Code of 1991) — Provides that the accountant shall certify to the availability of budgetary allotment to which expenditures and obligations may be properly charged. Held to be the applicable provision for certifying availability of funds for the approval of LGU appointments, as it pertains to obligations prior to actual disbursement.
• Section 344, Republic Act No. 7160 (Local Government Code of 1991) — Provides that no money shall be disbursed unless the local treasurer certifies to the availability of funds for the purpose. Held inapplicable to the approval of appointments, as it applies exclusively to actual disbursements of money for due and demandable obligations via vouchers.
• Section 5, Rule 7 and Section 5, Rule 45, 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure — Govern verification, certification against forum shopping, and dismissal of petitions. Interpreted in light of the doctrine of substantial compliance.

Reynato S. Puno (CJ), Leonardo A. Quisumbing, Consuelo Ynares-Santiago, Antonio T. Carpio, Ma. Alicia Austria-Martinez, Renato C. Corona, Adolfo Azcuna, Dante O. Tinga, Minita V. Chico-Nazario, Presbitero J. Velasco, Jr., Antonio Eduardo B. Nachura, Ruben T. Reyes, Teresita J. Leonardo-De Castro, Arturo D. Brion