Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence


Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence > Year 1967 > April 1967 Decisions > G.R. No. L-23932 April 27, 1967 - ABELARDO BUENO v. FRANCISCO G. CORDOBA, JR.:




PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

EN BANC

[G.R. No. L-23932. April 27, 1967.]

ABELARDO BUENO, Petitioner-Appellee, v. FRANCISCO G. CORDOBA, JR., Respondent-Appellant.

C.V. Saguyod and Francisco G. Cordoba, Jr. for respondent and Appellant.

Felix P. Adanzo for petitioner and appellee.


SYLLABUS


1. ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEEDINGS; HOW COMMENCED. — An administrative proceeding may be commenced in one of two ways: (1) upon a charge by the Department or Agency head; or (2) upon a complaint filed by any other person.

2. ID.; REQUIREMENT OF OATH REFERS ONLY TO PROCEEDINGS COMMENCED BY COMPLAINT. — The provision of Section 32 of the Civil Service Law (Rep. Act No. 2260) that no complaint shall be given due course unless under oath, pertains to administrative proceedings commenced by complaint. It does not apply to proceedings commenced by direct charge of the Department or Agency head, for in such event no complaint is required (Bautista v. Negado, 108 Phil., 283).

3. ID.; RCA GENERAL MANAGER NOT REQUIRED TO FILE SWORN COMPLAINT. — The RCA General Manager is the Agency head of said Office. The power to take disciplinary action against RCA employees lies in him (Sec. 4, Rep. Act No. 3452). From time to time he may receive reports from his subordinate officers on alleged irregularities by RCA employees, as part of the information regularly transmitted to him by said officers. Should he decide, upon the basis of such reports or otherwise, to file administrative charges himself, the law does not require of him what it requires of other persons who wish to institute administrative proceedings against the employees of his office: a sworn complaint.

4. ID.; ID.; REASON FOR RULE. — The reasons for the difference are not hard to see. The position of responsibility which he occupies sufficiently warrants that his charges are worth investigating. And he acts in the performance of a function he has already sworn, upon assuming office, to faithfully discharge.

5. ID.; ID.; CASE AT BAR. — Regardless of whether the report of Josefita Asis-Villegas is a complaint or not, the administrative proceedings not having been commenced thereby, it not being under oath is beside the point. Said proceedings being upon the instance of the RCA General Manager himself, a sworn complaint is not required under the law.


D E C I S I O N


BENGZON, J.P., J.:


A report dated March 21, 1963 to the Rice and Corn Administration General Manager from Josefita Asis-Villegas, RCA Incharge at Daet, Camarines Norte, ran in part as follows:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph

"I have the honor to make the following reports:chanrob1es virtual 1aw library

x       x       x


"2. Sometime about the middle of February, we received a notice of shipment of rice from Manila via MRR. Mr. Bueno, the warehouseman, authorized Mr. Crispiniano Tolentino, Sales Supervisor to take delivery from Sipocot MRR Station and to convoy the truck loaded with rice to Daet. I noticed that one truck did not carry a whole load so I inquired from one of the laborers why the load seem to be lacking. He told me that by order of Mr. Bueno, 20 bags were unloaded at the house of the trucking contractor by the name of Mr. Sancho Asis. Mr. Tolentino admitted unloading 20 bags at Mr. Asis’ house. In order to verify I personally went to Mr. Asis and inquired. He admitted that 20 bags were unloaded in his house, and added further that this was the quantity he requested to buy for his laborers. I told him that the transaction was irregular, as we are not allowed to sell by the sack much less 20 sacks to anybody.

"By the above incident there are violations made on our existing regulation like unauthorized issue of rice without the necessary papers like Official Receipt and Invoice, issue of rice to unauthorized person (not a retailer)."cralaw virtua1aw library

The RCA General Manager filed on March 29, 1963 an administrative charge against Abelardo Bueno (Adm. Case No. 29-S-63), stating:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph

"As employee of the RCA in Daet, Camarines Norte, you are hereby charged of misconduct in office and violation of office rules and regulations in that on the middle part of February, 1963, you ordered 20 bags of RCA rice be unloaded in the house of certain Sancho Asis without supporting papers in form of official receipts and invoices."cralaw virtua1aw library

Neither the report nor the charge was under oath.

RCA investigator Francisco G. Cordoba, Jr. was subsequently assigned to conduct the administrative investigation. Submitting to him a motion to dismiss, Bueno argued that pursuant to Section 32 of Republic Act 2260 the administrative investigation cannot proceed without a sworn complaint. Said motion was denied.

Pressing the same argument, Bueno filed in the Court of First Instance of Camarines Norte a petition for certiorari and prohibition with preliminary injunction against the RCA investigator. And after submission of the case upon the pleadings, said court rendered judgment on July 6,1964 restraining the respondent from proceeding with the investigation. Respondent has appealed to Us to raise questions of law.

The principal issue is whether petitioner’s investigation is legal notwithstanding that no sworn complaint was filed against him.

The provision of Section 32, Republic Act 2260 — the Civil Service Act — relied upon by petitioner, states:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph

"SECTION 32. Disciplinary action. — No officer or employee in the civil service shall be removed or suspended except for cause as provided by law and after due process: . . . Provided, further, That no complaint against a civil service official or employee shall be given due course unless the same is in writing and subscribed and sworn to by the complainant: . . ."cralaw virtua1aw library

And implementing said provision is Section 24 of Rule XVIII of the Civil Service, also invoked by petitioner, as follows:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph

"Sec. 24. Except as otherwise provided by law, administrative proceedings may be commenced against a subordinate officer or employee by the head of Department or agency concerned or upon complaint of any other person; Provided, That no complaint against a civil service official or employee shall be given due course unless the same is in writing and subscribed and sworn to by the complainant."cralaw virtua1aw library

It can readily be seen from the foregoing that an administrative proceeding may be commenced in one of two ways: (1) upon a charge by the Department or Agency head; or (2) upon a complaint filed by any other person. Therefore, the aforementioned provision that no complaint shall be given due course unless under oath, pertains to administrative proceedings commenced by complaint. It does not apply to proceedings commenced by direct charge of the Department or Agency head, for in such event no complaint is required (Bautista v. Negado, L-14319, May 26, 1960).

The RCA General Manager is the Agency head of said office. The power to take disciplinary action against RCA employees lies in him (Sec. 4, RA 3452). From time to time he may receive reports from his subordinate officers on alleged irregularities by RCA employees, as part of the information regularly transmitted to him by said officers. Should he decide, upon the basis of such reports or otherwise, to file administrative charges himself, the law does not require of him what it requires of other persons who wish to institute administrative proceedings against the employees of his office: a sworn complaint.

The reasons for the difference are not hard to see. The position of responsibility which he occupies sufficiently warrants that his charges are worth investigating. And he acts in the performance of a function he has already sworn, upon assuming office, to faithfully discharge.

Regardless, therefore, of whether the report of Josefita Asis-Villegas is a complaint or not, the administrative proceedings not having been commenced thereby, its not being under oath is beside the point. Said proceedings being upon the instance of the RCA General Manager himself, a sworn complaint is not required under the law.

Wherefore, the judgment appealed from is hereby reversed and set aside and the petition filed below is dismissed. With costs against petitioner-appellee. So ordered.

Concepcion, C.J., Reyes, J.B.L., Dizon, Regala, Makalintal, Zaldivar, Sanchez and Castro, JJ., concur.




Back to Home | Back to Main




















chanrobles.com





ChanRobles On-Line Bar Review

ChanRobles Internet Bar Review : www.chanroblesbar.com

ChanRobles MCLE On-line

ChanRobles Lawnet Inc. - ChanRobles MCLE On-line : www.chanroblesmcleonline.com






April-1967 Jurisprudence                 

  • G.R. No. L-18127 April 5, 1967 - IN RE: CORAZON ADOLFO CALDERON v. REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES

  • G.R. No. L-19726 April 13, 1967 - DOMINGO IMPERIAL v. VENANCIO P. ZIGA

  • G.R. Nos. L-24235-36 April 18, 1967 - STA. CECILIA SAWMILLS, INC. v. COURT OF INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-20215 April 24, 1967 - DIONISIO PEREZ v. CENTRAL AZUCARERA DON PEDRO

  • G.R. Nos. L-20246-48 April 24, 1967 - JORGE VYTIACO v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-22591 April 24, 1967 - IN RE: ANG CHUN v. REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES

  • G.R. No. L-23102 April 24, 1967 - CECILIO MENDOZA v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. Nos. L-16204 & L-16256 April 24, 1967 - ERNESTO A. PAPA, ET AL. v. SEVERO J. SANTIAGO

  • G.R. No. L-17599 April 24, 1967 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES v. NICOLAS CUNANAN, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-19606 April 24, 1967 - BUENAVENTURA TAN v. HON. MACARIO PERALTA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-23387 April 24, 1967 - IN RE: LIM SIH BENG v. REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES

  • G.R. No. L-23611 April 24, 1967 - GUAGUA ELECTRIC LIGHT PLANT CO., INC. v. COLLECTOR OF INTERNAL REVENUE, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-22310 April 24, 1967 - IN RE: TAN CHUA v. REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES

  • G.R. No. L-22500 April 24, 1967 - NEW ZEALAND INSURANCE CO., LTD. v. MANILA PORT SERVICE, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-23855 April 24, 1967 - IN RE: WONG CHUI v. REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES

  • G.R. No. L-23390 April 24, 1967 - MINDANAO PORTLAND CEMENT CORP. v. MCDONOUGH CONSTRUCTION CO. OF FLORIDA

  • A.C. No. 561 April 27, 1967 - IN RE: ATTY. ISIDRO P. VINZON

  • G.R. No. L-18762 April 27, 1967 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES v. MARIANO AYOSO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-18911 April 27, 1967 - REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES v. CLEOFE RAMOS

  • G.R. No. L-19425 April 27, 1967 - DEMOSTHENES MEDIANTE, ET AL. v. HON. MONTANO ORTIZ

  • G.R. No. L-20083 April 27, 1967 - CRISOSTOMO BONILLA, ET AL. v. SEC. OF AGRI. & NATURAL RESOURCES, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-20338 April 27, 1967 - BANAGAN LUMIGUIS, ET AL. v. PEOPLE OF THE PHIL.

  • G.R. No. L-20408 April 27, 1967 - NARCISO SOLANCHO v. JOSEFA RAMOS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-20623 April 27, 1967 - IN RE: LAW TAI v. REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL.

  • G.R. No. L-20797 April 27, 1967 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. FELIPE CRUZ, JR., ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-21118 April 27, 1967 - LEON CLIMACO v. CARLOS SIY UY, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-21724 April 27, 1967 - NATIONAL DEVELOPMENT CO. v. WORKMEN’S COMPENSATION COMMISSION, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-22409 April 27, 1967 - RIZAL SURETY AND INSURANCE CO., INC. v. MANILA RAILROAD CO., ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-22625 April 27, 1967 - FIREMAN’S FUND INS. CO. v. COMPAÑIA GENERAL DE TABACOS DE FILIPINAS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-22688 April 27, 1967 - UNITED INSURANCE CO., INC. v. ROYAL INTEROCEAN LINES, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-22819 April 27, 1967 - PROCTER & GAMBLE PHILIPPINE MANUFACTURING CORP. v. COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS

  • G.R. No. L-23932 April 27, 1967 - ABELARDO BUENO v. FRANCISCO G. CORDOBA, JR.

  • G.R. No. L-24037 April 27, 1967 - ALBERTO DE JOYA, ET AL. v. HON. GREGORIO T. LANTIN, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-23766 April 27, 1967 - REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL. v. JOSE C. TAYENGCO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-23734 April 27, 1967 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. TEODORO SABIO

  • G.R. No. L-23676 April 27, 1967 - TAN GUAN v. COURT OF TAX APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-19475 April 27, 1967 - IN RE: JIMMY CHUA YANCHO v. REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL.

  • G.R. No. L-25467 April 27, 1967 - LUCAS V. CAUTON v. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-17845 April 27, 1967 - SIMEON SADAYA v. FRANCISCO SEVILLA

  • G.R. No. L-19570 April 27, 1967 - JOSE V. HILARIO, JR. v. CITY OF MANILA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-20195 April 27, 1967 - HEIRS OF JULIAN MOLINA, ET AL. v. HONORIA VDA. DE BACUD, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-20886 April 27, 1967 - NATIONAL MARKETING CORP. v. ASSOCIATED FINANCE CO., INC., ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-20997 April 27, 1967 - IN RE: ONG HUAN TIN v. REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL.

  • G.R. No. L-22065 April 27, 1967 - FRANCISCO ORTIZ v. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-21113 April 27, 1967 - MIGUEL OCAMPO v. HON. HERMOGENES CALUAG, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-21550 April 27, 1967 - ALFREDO DIAZ v. LUIS MOLINA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-21705 April 27, 1967 - NAWASA v. HON. ALFREDO CATOLICO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-22515 April 27, 1967 - EXTENSIVE ENTERPRISES CORP. v. COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS

  • G.R. No. L-23377 April 27, 1967 - CARLOS KAHN, ET AL. v. JACOBO ASUNCION, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-26558 April 27, 1967 - AMADO O. IBAÑEZ, ET AL. v. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-20701 April 27, 1967 - MARIA L. VDA. DE MlSA, ET AL. v. NATIONAL MARKETING CORP.

  • G.R. No. L-22650 April 28, 1967 - REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL. v. THE WORKMEN’S COMPENSATION COMMISSION, ET AL.