Facts:

The case involves Omar Erasmo G. Ampongan (petitioner), a former Vice-Mayor of Iriga City, who was charged with grave misconduct, dishonesty, and oppression. His term ended on June 30, 2016. The respondents included five members of the Sangguniang Panlungsod of Iriga City and the Human Resource Management Officer (HRMO). The events leading to the case began in June 2014 when the position of Secretary of the Sangguniang Panlungsod became vacant due to the retirement of Dandy V. Fraginal. On June 30, 2014, Avelino Pedro Vargas Jr. was designated as Officer-in-Charge (OIC) Secretary. On September 15, 2014, the Sangguniang Panlungsod, with Benjamin P. Epres as Acting Presiding Officer, passed Resolution No. 2014-138, stating that the vacant position should be filled by the next-in-rank employee. However, on November 3, 2014, Ampongan signed an Appointment Paper appointing Edsel Dimaiwat, an outsider, as SP Secretary, falsely certifying that Dimaiwat had been screened and found qu...

Facts:

Background of the Case

• Petitioner Omar Erasmo G. Ampongan, former Vice-Mayor of Iriga City (salary grade 26), whose term expired on June 30, 2016, faced administrative investigation.
• Respondents include five members of the Iriga City Sangguniang Panlungsod and the Human Resource Management Officer (HRMO) of the city.
• The controversy centers on the appointment of Mr. Edsel Dimaiwat as Secretary of the Sangguniang Panlungsod (SP).

Appointment Process and Procedural Irregularities

• In June 2014, the position of Secretary of the SP became vacant following the retirement of Dandy V. Fraginal.
• On June 30, 2014, Supervising Administrative Officer Avelino Pedro Vargas Jr. was designated as Officer-in-Charge (OIC)-SP Secretary.
• On September 15, 2014, the SP, with respondent Epres as Acting Presiding Officer, passed Resolution No. 2014-138 stating that the next-in-rank employee should fill the vacant position.
• Contrary to the resolution, on November 3, 2014, petitioner signed an Appointment Paper designating Dimaiwat—a non-PSB screened, outsider-applicant—as the SP Secretary with permanent status.
• Petitioner certified in the dorsal portion of the Appointment Paper that Dimaiwat had been screened and found qualified by the Personnel Selection Board (PSB), even though no such screening took place.
• Respondents issued a Certification on the Failure of PSB Screening on November 6, 2014, stating that the petitioner’s certification was false and that the scheduled PSB meeting did not occur.
• On November 10, 2014, the Civil Service Commission (CSC) through its Camarines Sur Field Office disapproved Dimaiwat’s appointment for noncompliance with CSC MC No. 3, s. 2001 and CSC MC No. 40, s. 1998.

Actions and Communications Leading to the Appointment

• Petitioner’s counter-affidavit claimed that he initially requested HRMO Nenet B. BeriAa on June 29, 2014, to publish the vacancy for the position.
• Upon learning on July 23, 2014, that the vacancy was not published, he personally ensured its publication and later received applications from Dimaiwat and Vargas, Jr.
• On August 7, 2014, petitioner received a letter from HRMO instructing that any appointment must first be evaluated by the PSB.
• Despite sending a reply on August 11, 2014, requesting immediate evaluation, petitioner was met with inaction.
• A query on August 15, 2014, to the CSC regarding the power to create a PSB further clarified that while the Vice Mayor could chair a PSB, he could not create one by office order.
• Petitioner notified the PSB members via a letter on October 8, 2014, for a meeting on October 13, 2014; however, the PSB members did not attend the meeting.
• Sensing futility in holding another meeting, petitioner proceeded with the evaluation on his own, finding Dimaiwat qualified and subsequently appointing him on November 3, 2014.
• Petitioner attached the Minutes of the PSB Evaluation and a November 4, 2014 letter to the CSC field office as part of his documented disclosure of events.

Administrative Actions and Subsequent Proceedings

• On January 5, 2017, the Ombudsman rendered a decision finding petitioner administratively liable for Grave Misconduct and Dishonesty, imposing a suspension of one (1) year without pay—with conversion to a fine if suspension could not be enforced.
• A motion for reconsideration was filed by the petitioner on February 14, 2019, but was denied in an Order dated April 5, 2017.
• The Court of Appeals (CA), in a Decision dated January 22, 2019, affirmed the Ombudsman’s decision, dismissing petitioner’s good faith defense by emphasizing his lack of effort to ensure procedural compliance.
• Petitioner’s subsequent motion for reconsideration was also denied by the CA Resolution dated June 25, 2019, prompting the current petition.

Arguments Presented by the Parties

• Petitioner argued that he acted in good faith, did not intend to commit wrongdoing, and that his attachment of the PSB Evaluation Minutes disclosed the irregularities transparently.
• He claimed that any departure from procedure was due to the non-attendance of the PSB members, who he alleged were politically motivated in obstructing the appointment process.
• The Office of the Ombudsman contended that there was ample evidence of petitioner’s clear bias and procedurally irregular appointment of Dimaiwat, underscoring acts of irreparable falsification and misrepresentation.

Issue:

• Whether the Court of Appeals erred in finding petitioner Omar Erasmo G. Ampongan guilty of grave misconduct and dishonesty.
• Whether the petitioner’s assertion of good faith and disclosure through the PSB evaluation minutes exonerates him from the charge of dishonesty.
• Whether the irregularities in following the proper appointment procedure warrant the imposition of administrative penalties, and if so, which penalty is appropriate.

Ruling:

• (Subscriber-Only)

Ratio:

• (Subscriber-Only)

Doctrine:

• (Subscriber-Only)