[ G.R. No. 142679. June 14, 2000]

JOSE L. OLARTE vs. BEETHOVEN L. RUALO, et al.

THIRD DIVISION

Gentlemen:

Quoted hereunder, for your information, is a resolution of this Court dated JUN 14 2000.

G.R. No. 142679 (Jose L. Olarte vs. Beethoven L. Rualo, Commissioner of Internal Revenue, Doming Alvarez, Chief Internal Security Division, et al.)

Petitioner assails the decision of the Court of Appeals which affirmed the resolution of the Commissioner of Internal Revenue recommending the dismissal of the counter charges filed by petitioner against Dominador Villavicencio, an Investigator for the Internal Security Division of the Bureau of Internal Revenue.

It appears that petitioner, a lawyer and a revenue officer of the Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR), was under investigation for a capital gains tax scandal at the City Assessor's Office of Baguio City. On the basis of said investigation, Dominador Villavicencio filed an administrative case for grave misconduct and conduct prejudicial to the best interest of the service against petitioner.

On the other hand, petitioner filed counter charges against Villavicencio, alleging that the latter was in unlawful possession of confidential documents stolen form the custody of the assessment division of the BIR.

In a resolution dated September 29, 1998, respondent BIR Commissioner Beethoven Rualo recommended the dismissal of the charges against Villavicencio due to the absence of probable cause, and because it seemed that the charges were filed so as to pressure, harass, and intimidate Villavicencio against investigating and charging petitioner. Without moving her reconsideration of the BIR Commissioner's resolution, petitioner went to the Court of Appeals to set aside said resolution.

The Court of Appeals dismissed the petition. Thus, the instant petition which must likewise fail.

Section 48(2) of Book V of the Revised Administrative Code of 1987 provides:

In case of a complaint filed by any other persons, the complainant shall submit sworn statements covering his testimony and those of his witnesses together with his documentary evidence. If on the basis of such papers a prima facie case is found not to exist, the disciplining authority shall dismiss the case. x x x x.

From the above-cited provision, it is clear that the BIR Commissioner's dismissal of petitioner's charges against Villavicencio was well within the Commissioner's disciplining authority. There is neither abuse of discretion nor abuse of authority. Grave abuse of discretion implies such capricious and whimsical exercise of judgment as is equivalent to lack of jurisdiction, or, in other words where the power is exercised in an arbitrary or despotic manner by reason of passion or personal hostility, and it must be so patent and gross as to amount to an evasion of positive duty or to a virtual refusal to perform the duty enjoined or to act at all in contemplation of law (Cuison vs. Court of Appeals, 289 SCRA 159).

WHEREFORE, petition is denied due course.

SO ORDERED.

Very truly yours,

(Sgd.) JULIETA Y. CARREON

Clerk of Court


Back to Home | Back to Main

 

CLICK HERE FOR THE LATEST SUPREME COURT JURISPRUDENCE

PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

QUICK SEARCH

cralaw

 







chanrobles.com





ChanRobles Legal Resources:

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