ChanRobles Virtual law Library
[G.R. No. 133511.
SECOND DIVISION
Gentlemen:
Quoted hereunder, for your information is a resolution of this
Court dated
G.R. No. 133511 (Hon. William C. Padolina, in his capacity as Secretary of the DOST, et al., vs. Ofelia D. Fernandez.)
Respondent Ofelia D. Fernandez was the PAGASA Finance and Management Division Chief of the Department of Science and Technology (DOST).
On
On
With the respondent's failure to comply with her reassignment, a fact-finding committee was created to look into the matter. The committee recommended the filing of a formal charge against the respondent. It found the respondent guilty of insubordination and recommended a penalty of a suspension of one (1) month and one (1) day without pay. The petitioner issued a decision adopting the findings and recommendation of the committee.
The respondent appealed to the Court of Appeals questioning the CSC decision dismissing her appeal and denying her motion for reconsideration.
The Court of Appeals rendered a Decision on
On
On
On April 29, 2003, the respondent filed a Manifestation and Motion praying that pursuant to the July 14, 1999 Resolution of this Court, she be paid her back salaries, RATA, productivity, incentives, COLA, PERA, bonus, amelioration and clothing allowance. She alleged that she was not paid her honoraria corresponding to the same period in the amount of P37,200.00.
In its Comment, the Office of the Solicitor General opposed the motion contending that:
Honoraria as provided under National Compensation Circular (NCC) No. 75 (Prescribing Guidelines and Procedures for the Grant of Honoraria to Government Officials and Employees; March 1, 1995) is a form of compensation or reward paid over and above the regular pay in recognition of gratuitous services of, among others, agency personnel performing or discharging duties in agency activities or special projects in addition to over and above their regular functions. It is not a regular personnel services benefit as entitlement thereto is based on factors such as, but not limited to performance, productivity and number of hours rendered as provided under Item 6.3.3 of NCC 75.
Respondent herself admits that she "did not work during the entire pendency of the case or cases invoking Special Order No. 129 (reassignment) x x x" (Ibid.). Thus, there would be no basis for determining her honoraria since honoraria is based on performance, productivity and number of hours rendered in the project. Indeed, it is not denied that Carmelita Llanes, Ellaquim Aduy and Elisa Corpuz were alternately designated as officers-in-charge of FMD-PAGASA during the reassignments and correspondingly performed the functions pertaining to the special projects (Ibid., Annex C, p.2). [1] cralaw
We agree with the Office of the Solicitor General.
IN VIEW THEREOF, the respondent's motion for payment of honoraria is DENIED for lack of merit.
Very truly yours,
(Sgd.)TOMASITA M. DRIS
Clerk of Court
Endnotes:
[1] cralaw Rollo, pp. 257-258.
HERE FOR THE LATEST SUPREME COURT JURISPRUDENCE
PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS
QUICK SEARCH