CUEVAS V. MACATANGAY, etc. et al.

G.R. No. 208506, 22 February 2017

Second Division

The existence and availability of the right of appeal prohibits the resort
to certiorari because one of the requirements for the latter remedy is
the unavailability of appeal.

Petitioner Cuevas was appointed Director III of the National Museum.

The appointment was challenged but both the National Museum and the
Civil Service Commission found no merit to the protest. The CSC
however found that petitioner’s appointment was not in accordance with
law and thus recalled the appointment.

Director Jeremy Barns through a letter asked for clarification and

reconsideration in which the CSC, in a letter-response, declared that its
resolution became final and executory for failure to appeal, despite
proper notice to the National Museum and petitioner.

Is the letter-reply by the CSC subject to a petition for certiorari?

No, it was not. The letter-response did not decide the issue on the
validity or invalidity of petitioner’s appointment. Rather, the CSC
Resolution which invalidated petitioner’s appointment should have been
the subject of an appeal. This is a classic case of resorting to the filing
of a petition for certiorari when the remedy of an ordinary appeal can
no longer be availed of. Where appeal is available to the aggrieved
party, the special civil action of certiorari will not be entertained —
remedies of appeal and certiorari are mutually exclusive, not alternative
or successive. The proper remedy to obtain a reversal of judgment on
the merits, final order or resolution is appeal.