ChanRobles Virtual law Library
[G.R. No. 159705.
ROMERO vs. VILLARE
EN BANC
Gentlemen:
Quoted hereunder, for your information, is a resolution of this
Court dated
G.R. No. 159705 (Buenaventura V. Romero vs. William A. Villare.)
This case originated from an administrative complaint filed by petitioner Buenaventura V. Romero, a retired teacher applying for a teaching position at Calabanga High School (CHS), Camarines Sur, against respondent William A. Villare, Principal II of CHS for neglect of duty, gross insubordination, inefficiency and incompetence in the fulfillment of official duty1.
On
Respondent appealed to the DECS-Office of the Secretary
(DECS-OSEC). In a resolution8 dated
Petitioner appealed to the Civil Service Commission (CSC). On
On August 21, 2003, the" Court of Appeals rendered a decision12 dismissing the petitioner's appeal and affirming the CSC resolution.
On
On October 21, 2003, the Court resolved to deny the petition for review on certiorari of the decision of the Court of Appeals for failure to give an explanation why service was not done personally as required by Rule 13, Section 1115 in relation to Rule 45, Section 316 and Rule 56, Section 5(d)17; and insufficient or defective verification under Rule 7, Section 4,18 as the verification is based on knowledge and belief.19
On January 13, 2004, the Court denied with finality the motion for reconsideration filed by the petitioner on the resolution dated October 21, 2003 of the Court there being no compelling reason to warrant the reversal of the questioned resolution.
On February 12, 2004, petitioner filed a Manifestation20 asking this Court for a certified true copy of our Resolutions of October 21, 2003 and January 13, 2004 preparatory to his filing impeachment proceedings alleging that the minute resolutions signed by En Banc Assistant Clerk of Court Ma. Luisa D. Villarama were clear violations of the requirements of Sections 1321 and 1422 of Article VIII of the 1987 Constitution. He suggested that we had disregarded the constitutional requirement that decisions should state the facts and the law on which our resolution is rested.
Counsel of petitioner ought to review his Rules of Court and should have known that the requirement of Section 14 applies only to decisions, as distinguished from orders or resolutions.23 Every lawyer ought to know that a court of justice is not hidebound to write in its decision every bit and piece of evidence in every case brought before it. Minute resolutions have long been allowed and issued by courts of justice to expedite the administration of justice.We warn that this Court shall not tolerate the antics of petitioner with his threat of filing impeachment proceedings on members of this Court.
WHEREFORE, the prayer of petitioner is DENIED.
Vitug and Panganiban, JJ., are on official leave.
Very truly yours,
(Sgd.) LUZVIMINDA D. PUNO
Clerk of Court
Endnotes:
1 Rollo, p. 57
2 Id. at 67.
3 Administrative Code of 1987.
4 Section 11. Penalties.
(a) Any public official or employee, regardless of whether or not he holds office or employment in a casual, temporary, holdover, permanent or regular capacity, committing any violation of this Act shall be punished with a fine, not exceeding the equivalent of six (6) months salary or suspension not exceeding one (1) year, or removal depending on the gravity of the offense after due notice of hearing by the appropriate body or agency.If the violation is punishable by a heavier penalty under another law, he shall be prosecuted under the latter statute. Violation of Sections 7, 8 or 9 of this Act shall be punishable with imprisonment not exceeding five (5) years, or a fine not exceeding five thousand pesos (
P5,000.00), or both, and, in the discretion of the court of competent jurisdiction, disqualification to hold public office.5 An Act Establishing a Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards for Public Officials and Employees, to Uphold the Time-Honored Principle of Public Office Being a Public Trust, Granting Incentives and Rewards for Exemplary Service, Enumerating Prohibited Acts and Transactions and Providing Penalties for Violations Thereof and for Other Purposes.
6 Presidential Decree No. 807 - Providing for the Organization of the Civil Service Commission in accordance with provisions of the Constitution, prescribing its powers and functions and for other purposes.
7 Memorandum Circular No. 38 s. 1993.Omnibus Guidelines on Appointments and Other Personnel Actions. See Rollo pp. 87-94.
8 Rollo, pp. 71-75
9 Id. at 75
10 Id. at 77-79.
11 Id. at 58.
12 Id. 56-62.
13 Id. at 3-6.
14 Id at 7.
15 Section 11. Priorities in modes of service and filing. - Whenever practicable, the service and filing of pleadings and other papers shall be done personally. Except with respect to papers emanating from the court, a resort to other modes must be accompanied by a written explanation why the service or filing was not done personally. A violation of this Rule may be cause to consider the paper as not filed.
16 Section 3. Docket and other lawful fees; proof of service of petition. - Unless he has theretofore done so, the petitioner shall pay the corresponding docket and other lawful fees to the clerk of court of the Supreme Court and deposit the amount of P500.00 for costs at the time of the filing of the petition. Proof of service of a copy thereof on the lower court concerned and on the adverse party shall be submitted together with the petition.
17 Section 5. Grounds for dismissal of appeal.- The appeal may be dismissed motu proprio or on motion of the respondent on the following grounds:
. . .
(d) Failure to comply with the requirements regarding proof of service and contents of and the documents which should accompany the petition;
. . .
18 Section 4. Verification.-Except when otherwise specifically required by law or rule, pleadings need not be under oath, verified or accompanied by affidavit.
A pleading is verified by an affidavit that the affiant has read the pleading and that the allegations therein are true and correct of his personal knowledge or based on authentic records.
A pleading required to be verified which contains a verification based on "information and belief," or upon "knowledge, information and belief," or lacks a proper verification, shall be treated as an unsigned pleading.
19 Rollo, p. 138.
20 Id., at 158-165.
21 Sec. 13. The conclusions of the Supreme Court in any case submitted to it for decision en banc or in division shall be reached in consultation before the case is assigned to a Member for the writing of the opinion of the Court. A certification to this effect signed by the Chief Justice shall be issued and a copy thereof attached to the record of the case and served upon the parties. Any Member who took no part, or dissented or abstained from a decision or resolution must state the reason therefore. The same requirements shall be observed by all lower collegiate courts.
22 Sec. 14. No decision shall be rendered by any court without expressing therein clearly and distinctly the facts and the law on which it is based, No petition for review or motion for reconsideration of a decision of the court shall be refused due course or denied without stating the legal basis therefor.
23 Justice J.Y. Feria and Maria Conception Noche, Civil Procedure Annotated, Vol. I, Quezon City: Phoenix Press, 2001, p. 613 citing Novino v. Court of Appeals, No. L-21098, 31 May 1963, 8 SCRA 279, 280; Mendoza v. Court of First Instance of Quezon, Nos. L-35612-14, 27 June 1973, 51 SCRA 369; Amargo v. Court of Appeals, No. L-31762, 19 September 1973, 53 SCRA 64.
HERE FOR THE LATEST SUPREME COURT JURISPRUDENCE
PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS
QUICK SEARCH
