ChanRobles Virtual law Library

[G.R. No. 144001. September 26, 2000]

MARIVIC AGUILAR vs. CSC, et al.

EN BANC

Gentlemen:

Quoted hereunder, for your information, is a resolution of this Court dated SEPT 26 2000.

G.R. No. 144001 (Marivic Aguilar vs. Civil Service Commission and the Department of Labor.)

Before us is a petition for review on certiorari filed by petitioner Marivic Aguilar asking for the reversal of the Resolution of the Court of Appeals in CAG.R. SP No. 57334 dismissing the petition for annulment of judgment as well as the subsequent motion for reconsideration filed by petitioner.

This case stems from the dismissal of petitioner Aguilar as Stenographic Reporter I of the Philippine Overseas Employment Administration (POEA). The Order/Resolution of the Secretary of the Department of Labor and Employment dismissing petitioner from service was promulgated on August 11, 1997. Petitioner was dismissed from service because she could not produce the case folder in POEA Case No. RRB (I) 92-04-199 entitled "In Re: Recruitment. Violation of Fidelity Overseas Placement Services" which was supposed to be in her custody. She was charged with Gross Neglect of Duty and Inefficiency and Incompetence in the Performance of Official Functions and was subsequently found guilty by the Secretary of Labor.

Petitioner appealed the aforesaid order to herein respondent Civil Service Commission (CSC). The CSC promulgated its Order/Resolution No. 98-1524 on June 17, 1998 which modified the order of the Secretary of Labor and Employment and petitioner was instead meted a penalty of suspension for six (6) months without pay. The motion for reconsideration filed by petitioner was denied by the CSC for lack of merit.

On February 18, 2000, petitioner filed a "Petition for Annulment of Judgment" with the Court of Appeals against herein respondents DOLE and CSC on the ground of lack of jurisdiction and lack of substantial evidence to sustain the suspension against herein petitioner, as well as the fact that there exists a newly discovered evidence which if considered would belie the ground for suspension from employment of petitioner. This petition was dismissed by the Court of Appeals on March 23, 2000 on the ground that the petition filed with it was the wrong mode of appeal since the Court of Appeals can only entertain petitions for annulment of judgment from the judgments, final orders and resolutions issued by the Regional Trial Court in civil actions. The motion for reconsideration filed by petitioner was also denied. Hence, this petition.

Finding no reversible error in the decision rendered by the Court of Appeals, we uphold such decision. The petition for annulment filed by Aguilar with the Court of Appeals is based on Section 1, Rule 47 of the Revised Rules of Civil Procedure which states that:

Section 1. Coverage. - This Rule shall govern the annulment by the Court of Appeals of judgments or final orders and resolutions in civil actions of Regional Trial Courts for which the ordinary remedies of new trial, appeal, petition for relief or other appropriate remedies are no longer available through no fault of the petitioner.

Clearly, the mode of appeal undertaken by petitioner is an erroneous one. Herein petitioner is precluded from availing of such remedy with the Court of Appeals since the aforesaid rule covers only judgments, final orders and resolutions issued by the Regional Trial Court in civil actions. Since the decision appealed from was not rendered by a Regional Trial Court but by the Civil Service Commission acting in its quasi-judicial capacity, we have no other recourse but to deny such petition.

WHEREFORE, the instant petition is DENIED.

Very truly yours,

LUZVIMINDA D. PUNO

Clerk of Court�

(Sgd.) MA. LUISA D. VILLARAMA

Asst. Clerk of Court

Back to Home | Back to Main

CLICK HERE FOR THE LATEST SUPREME COURT JURISPRUDENCE