Yee vs. The Director of Public Schools

A public school teacher in the classified civil service who loses Filipino citizenship by marriage to a foreign national is disqualified from continuing in office, and removal on that ground is legal. Teaching in a public school is not among the unclassified service positions under Section 671 of the Revised Administrative Code; it is in the classified service, a public function that may be performed by Filipino citizens only. Under Section 675, an applicant must be a Filipino citizen and must continue to be one after appointment; a voluntary change of citizenship or a change by operation of law disqualifies the employee.

Antonia A. Yee was a public school teacher in the Division of Antique and a civil service eligible. The respondents were the Director of Public Schools, the Division Superintendent of Schools of Antique, the Secretary of Education, and the Commissioner of Civil Service, the administrative officials responsible for her appointment, supervision, and separation. The case implicated the classification of public school teaching under the Revised Administrative Code and the citizenship requirement for the civil service, as implemented by Circular No. 40, series of 1947.

Antonia A. Yee was appointed as a public school teacher in the Division of Antique in 1951. She was a civil service eligible as a regular national teacher, having passed the Junior Teachers' (Regular) Examination on or about December 29, 1955, and she received a monthly salary of P140.00. In the school year 1957-1958, she was actually teaching at the Buhang Elementary School, Buhang Hamtic, Antique.

On August 10, 1957, Yee married Ng Foo alias Pio Chet Yee, a Chinese citizen. As a result of the marriage, she became a Chinese citizen. Effective sometime on October 28, 1957, she was removed from her teaching service by virtue of Special Order No. 296, series of 1957, dated October 25, 1957, issued by the Division Superintendent of Schools of Antique. The removal was pursuant to the 2nd indorsement of the Director of Public Schools dated October 14, 1957, which disauthorized her continuance in the service on account of Circular No. 40, series of 1947.

Prior to the effectivity of the order of removal, Yee wrote a letter to the Commissioner of Civil Service dated October 25, 1957. She later wrote another letter dated September 26, 1958 addressed to the Division Superintendent of Schools of Antique asking for reinstatement. Special Order No. 296, the ruling of the Director of Public Schools in his 2nd indorsement dated October 14, 1957, and Circular No. 40, series of 1947, had never been appealed by Yee to the Secretary of Education. Yee came to know for the first time of the actions taken on her letter of October 25, 1957 sometime on January 9, 1959, when the Division Superintendent of Schools and the Director of Public Schools submitted their evidence in support of their motion to dismiss. Those documents showed that the Secretary of Education, in a 3rd indorsement dated March 17, 1958, concurred with the recommendation of the Director of Public Schools for denial of Yee's reinstatement to the service, and that on August 26, 1958, the Commissioner of Civil Service likewise concurred in the action separating Yee from the teaching service. Yee learned of the actions taken on her letter dated September 26, 1958 sometime in May 1959; those actions showed that in a 3rd indorsement dated February 2, 1959, the Secretary of Education ruled that Yee was still disqualified from holding any position in the teaching service, reiterating the position previously stated in the 3rd indorsement dated March 17, 1958, and that this reiterated ruling was duly noted by the Commissioner of Civil Service on March 24, 1959.

The original petition for mandamus was filed on October 11, 1958 against the Director of Public Schools and the Division Superintendent of Schools as the stated respondents. The case was later amended to include the Secretary of Education and the Commissioner of Civil Service as additional respondents. The parties submitted a stipulation of facts, and the case reached the Supreme Court on appeal from the judgment of the Court of First Instance of Antique.

• Legality of Removal: Whether the removal of Antonia A. Yee from her position as public school teacher in the Buhang Elementary School, Hamtic, Antique, on account of her loss of Filipino citizenship by marriage to a Chinese citizen, is illegal.
• Cause of Action and Mandamus: Whether Yee has a cause of action against the respondents and may secure reinstatement to her former position through mandamus proceedings.
• Exhaustion of Administrative Remedies: Whether Yee exhausted all administrative remedies.

• Legality of Removal: No. The removal was legal because teaching in a public school is in the classified civil service, a public function that may be performed by Filipino citizens only, and Yee ceased to be a Filipino citizen upon her marriage.
• Cause of Action and Mandamus: Yes, as to the existence of a cause of action and the availability of mandamus if illegal removal is established; but the petition fails because the removal was legal. A cause of action exists when the facts alleged, admitted, or proved would support a valid judgment, and mandamus may secure reinstatement for an illegal removal.
• Exhaustion of Administrative Remedies: Not passed upon. The Court found it unnecessary to resolve in view of its conclusion on the legality of the removal.

• Legality of Removal: Section 671 of the Revised Administrative Code enumerates the officers and employees constituting the unclassified service. Teaching in a public school is not included in that enumeration; therefore, it falls within the classified service. The performance of teaching in a public school is a public function that may be performed by Filipino citizens only. Section 675 requires an applicant for admission to examination for entrance into the civil service to be a citizen of the Philippines. After qualification and appointment, the employee must continue to be such citizen. A voluntary change of citizenship or a change by operation of law disqualifies the employee from continuing to hold the civil service position to which he had qualified and been appointed. Yee married Ng Foo alias Pio Chet Yee, a Chinese citizen, on August 10, 1957. By that marriage, she ceased to be a Filipino citizen and became a Chinese citizen. Consequently, she was no longer qualified to continue holding the civil service position to which she had qualified and been appointed. Section 681, which provides a preference for citizens of the Philippines in making selections from lists of certified eligibles, is not an argument against the limitation of holding public offices to Filipino citizens; that preference was operative before July 4, 1946, or before the Philippines became an independent nation.
• Cause of Action and Mandamus: A cause of action exists if, upon the facts alleged in a complaint admitted by the adverse party or proved by admissible and credible evidence, a valid judgment may be rendered by a competent court. In her petition for mandamus, Yee alleged that she was illegally removed from her teaching position. If that allegation were established or proved, a valid judgment could be rendered reinstating her to her position. Hence, a cause of action exists against those responsible for her removal, and the remedy of mandamus is available to secure her reinstatement. However, because the removal was legal, the petition cannot succeed.
• Exhaustion of Administrative Remedies: In view of the conclusion arrived at, the point of exhaustion of administrative remedy need not be passed upon.

• Citizenship qualification for classified civil service — Public school teaching is in the classified civil service because it is not among the unclassified positions enumerated in Section 671 of the Revised Administrative Code. It is a public function that may be performed by Filipino citizens only. Under Section 675, an applicant for civil service examination must be a Filipino citizen, and after appointment the employee must continue to be one; a voluntary change of citizenship or a change by operation of law disqualifies the employee. Applied: Yee's marriage to a Chinese citizen made her a Chinese citizen, so her removal was legal.
• Cause of action and mandamus for illegal removal — A cause of action exists if the facts alleged in a complaint, admitted by the adverse party or proved by admissible and credible evidence, would allow a competent court to render a valid judgment. Mandamus is available to secure reinstatement to a position from which an employee was illegally removed. Applied: Yee's allegation of illegal removal sufficed to establish a cause of action and the availability of mandamus, but the petition failed on the merits because the removal was legal.
• Preference for citizens under Section 681 — The statutory preference for citizens of the Philippines in appointments from lists of certified eligibles does not negate the limitation of public offices to Filipino citizens. The preference was operative before July 4, 1946, or before Philippine independence. Applied: Section 681 did not save Yee's position after she lost Filipino citizenship.

• "There is, however, no doubt that her removal as a public school teacher because of loss of Filipino citizenship is legal. Not being included in section 671 of the Revised Administrative Code which enumerates the officers and employees constituting the unclassified service, teaching in a public school is in the classified service — a public function which may be performed by Filipino citizens only." — This is the ratio decidendi: it classifies public school teaching and upholds the removal on citizenship grounds.
• "An applicant for admission to examination for entrance into the civil service must be a citizen of the Philippines (section 675 of the Revised Administrative Code). And after he had qualified himself to be eligible for appointment to a civil service position and had been appointed to such position, he must continue to be such citizen. A voluntary change of citizenship or a change thereof by operation of law disqualifies him to continue holding the civil service position to which he had qualified and had been appointed." — This states the continuing citizenship requirement for the classified civil service and supplies the rule applied to Yee's marriage.
• "A cause of action exists if upon the facts alleged in a complaint admitted by the adverse party or proved by admissible and credible evidence a valid judgment may be rendered by a competent court." — This defines the test for a cause of action and supports the Court's holding that Yee had a cause of action and that mandamus was available, even though the petition ultimately failed on the merits.

• Section 671, Revised Administrative Code — Enumerates the officers and employees constituting the unclassified service. Because public school teaching is not included in that enumeration, it falls within the classified service, a public function that may be performed by Filipino citizens only.
• Section 675, Revised Administrative Code — Requires an applicant for admission to examination for entrance into the civil service to be a citizen of the Philippines. The Court applied it to require continuing Filipino citizenship after appointment, so that a voluntary change of citizenship or a change by operation of law disqualifies the employee from continuing in the civil service position.
• Section 681, Revised Administrative Code — Provides a preference, when other qualifications are equal, for citizens of the Philippines and for honorably discharged soldiers, sailors, and mariners of the United States in selections from lists of certified eligibles. The Court held it is no argument against the limitation of holding public offices to citizens of the Philippines, because the preference operated before July 4, 1946, or before Philippine independence.

Bengzon, C.J., Bautista Angelo, Labrador, Concepcion, Reyes, J.B.L., Barrera, Paredes, Dizon, Regala, and Makalintal, JJ., concur.