ChanRobles Virtual law Library

[ G.R. No. 142615. June 20, 2000]

PROVINCE OF BENGUET, et al. vs. COA

EN BANC

Gentlemen:

Quoted hereunder, for your information, is a resolution of this Court dated JUN 20 2000.

G.R. No. 142615 (Province of Benguet, Provincial Governor Raul Mencio Molintas, et al. vs. Commission on Audit.)

Petitioners assail the decision of the Commission on Audit declaring that petitioner Cornel ceased being a de facto officer from March 7, 1997 until his retirement on February 15, 1998, consequently disregarding the recommendation of the Provincial Auditor of Benguet for the lifting of the disallowance of the amount of P450,675.93 representing Cornel's salaries for said period.

On January 1, 1996, petitioner Cornel was appointed General Services Officer by his co-petitioner Raul Molintas, the Provincial Governor of Benguet. On January 23, 1996, the appointment was disapproved by the Civil Service Commission, Cordillera Administrative Region (CSC-CAR), on the ground that Cornel did not possess the required educational qualifications and experience prescribed by law for said position. Petitioners appealed the action to the Civil Service Commission (CSC), but the same and a subsequent motion for reconsideration were both denied. Meanwhile, Cornel continued to perform the functions of said position and had received the salaries and other benefits attached to the position until his retirement on February 15, 1998.

Unperturbed, petitioners elevated their case to the Court of Appeals via a petition for certiorari but the same was dismissed on, among other grounds, that it was a wrong mode of appeal. Petitioners then attempted to salvage the situation by filing a motion for reconsideration with apology and motion to admit petition but the same was denied.

While the motion for reconsideration was pending with the Court of Appeals, the Commission on Audit conducted a post audit on the salaries of petitioner Cornel from January 16, 1996 to January 1998, resulting in the issuance of a Notice of Disallowance. On motion for reconsideration, the provincial auditor recommended the lifting of the disallowance. However, on August 19, 1998, petitioners received the 65th Indorsement of the province transmitting the decision of the Regional Director IV of the Commission on Audit contained in COA-CAR Decision No. 98-006, modifying the recommendation of the auditor by lifting the disallowance only up to May 6, 1997.

Discontented, petitioners filed a petition for certiorari contesting COA-CAR 98-606.

Finally, on March 16, 2000, the Commission on Audit rendered the above assailed decision declaring that Cornel had ceased to be a de facto officer on May 7, 1997, and is thus not entitled to receive any salary from said date, using as a basis the resolution of the Court of Appeals which denied petitioners' motion for reconsideration declaring that the decision sought to be reviewed had become final and executory on May 7, 1997.

Thus, the instant petition.

Whatever sorry state petitioner Cornel is in, he inflicted it upon himself. The Omnibus Guidelines on Appointment and other personnel actions (MC No. 38 s. 1993) provide that services rendered by a person from the duration of his disapproved appointment shall not be credited as government service for whatever purpose. The law cannot be clearer than that. Petitioner Cornel was appointed on January 1, 1996. On January 23, 1996, the same was disapproved by the CSS-CAR and this disapproval was affirmed by the CSC-Central Office on October 14, 1996, and reiterated on March 25, 1997 when a motion for reconsideration was denied. Finally, the disapproval of the appointment was in effect yet again sanctioned by the Court of Appeals when it denied petitioners' petition for certiorari and a subsequent motion for reconsideration on May 4, 1998, declaring that since the petitioners received copy of the assailed CSC resolution denying his motion for reconsideration on April 21, 1997, he had only fifteen (15) days therefrom or until May 6, 1997 within which to filed a petition for review. The petition for certiorari that he filed, being the wrong procedural recourse at the time it was filed, did not interrupt the running of the period for appealing (Oriental Media, Inc. vs. Court of Appeals, 250 SCRA 647, 653).

Under the de facto doctrine, a person who, by the proper authority, is admitted and sworn into office is deemed to be rightfully in such office until, by judicial declaration in a proper proceeding, he is ousted therefrom, or his admission thereto is declared void. (H.M. de Leon, Law on Public Officers, 2 nd Edition, 1994, p. 102). The fact that there was a final declaration by the Civil Service Commission disapproving Cornel's appointment will suffice that "his admission thereto is declared void" and the subsequent decision upholding the CSC Resolution by the Court of Appeals likewise satisfied the requirement that there was "judicial declaration" on the matter.

WHEREFORE, petition is dismissed.

Vitug, J., is abroad on official business.

Very truly yours,

LUZVIMINDA D. PUNO

Clerk of Court

(Sgd.) MA. LUISA D. VILLARAMA

Assistant Clerk of Court

Back to Home | Back to Main

CLICK HERE FOR THE LATEST SUPREME COURT JURISPRUDENCE