ChanRobles Virtual law Library

[G.R. No. 140839.� August 10, 2005]

RIVAS vs. SISON

Sirs/Mesdames:

Quoted hereunder, for your information, is a resolution of this Court dated AUG 10 2005.

G.R. No. 140839 (Abelardo C. Rivas vs. Jesus C. Sison, et al.)

Before the Court is respondents' Motion for Reconsideration of the Decision promulgated on May 26, 2005 granting the petition, thereby dismissing the administrative complaint against petitioner and ordering the MTRCB to pay petitioner backwages for the duration of his suspension and to revert him back to his former assignment as Registration Officer II in the Technical Service Division of the MTRCB.

Respondents argue that the decision should be reconsidered for the following reasons:

1.� The sworn statement of witness Marcelina Conception is credible because while said witness resides and works in Bacolod City, this does not preclude her from having personal knowledge of the complained acts of petitioner since there is no evidence ruling out the possibility that she traveled to their booking office in Escolta, manila.

2.� The sworn statement of witness Marvin Ynigo is also credible. Said witness' lack of prudence in entrusting the money for registration fees in the year 1993 despite petitioner's failure to give him the certificates for the previous years should not be used to justify the malfeasance of petitioner.

The OSG also manifested that the MTRCB can no longer comply with the Court's order to revert petitioner to his former position because after petitioner served his suspension, he failed to return to work despite the MTRCB's Return-To-Work Order dated January 14, 2000. Thus, effective June 28, 2000, petitioner had been dropped from the service for being AWOL continuously since February 2000.

The Court finds the motion for reconsideration unmeritorious.

The Court thoroughly examined and weighed the evidence brought before it and found the same insufficient to hold petitioner liable for the administrative charge against him. Thus, respondents' arguments in the instant motion for reconsideration are insufficient to convince the Court to reverse its decision.

However, in view of the manifestation of the OSG that petitioner had been dropped from the service for having been on AWOL since February 2000, the Court recognizes the impossibility of reverting petitioner back to his former position as Registration Officer II of the MTRCB.

WHEREFORE, the dispositive portion of the Decision dated May 26, 2005 is hereby MODIFIED to read as follows:

IN VIEW OF THE FOREGOING, the petition is hereby GRANTED. The Decision of the Court of Appeals dated September 24, 1999 and its Resolution dated November 16, 1999 are hereby REVERSED and SET ASIDE. The administrative complaint against petitioner is DISMISSED for lack of merit and the Movie and Television Review and Classification Board is ORDERED to pay petitioner backwages for the duration of his suspension.

SO ORDERED.

Very truly yours,

(Sgd.) LUDICHI YASAY-NUNAG
Clerk of Court

Back to Home | Back to Main

CLICK HERE FOR THE LATEST SUPREME COURT JURISPRUDENCE