Title
Baldoz vs. Office of the President
Case
G.R. No. L-44622
Decision Date
Aug 26, 1977
Former Commercial Attaché dismissed for insubordination; sought reinstatement after executive clemency, but position abolished. SC upheld dismissal, citing due process and good-faith abolition.
Font Size:

Case Digest (G.R. No. L-44622)

Facts:

Background and Position

Marcela M. Baldoz, the petitioner, was formerly a Commercial Attaché assigned to Berne, Switzerland, under the Department of Commerce and Industry (now the Department of Trade).

Charges and Investigation

On April 22, 1971, formal charges were filed against her for insubordination and violation of office regulations, particularly for going on home leave without the approval of then Secretary Ernesto Maceda. After an investigation by a special committee, she was found guilty and ordered dismissed effective July 16, 1971.

Civil Service Commission Proceedings

The case was elevated to the Civil Service Commission (CSC) after her dismissal. Initially, the CSC reduced the penalty to a fine equivalent to ten days' pay. However, upon reconsideration, the CSC modified its decision, requiring her to seek transfer to another office within 90 days or be considered resigned.

Further Modifications and Executive Clemency

Petitioner sought further reconsideration, leading to another modification by the CSC: if she failed to transfer within the 90-day period, she would be considered resigned but could be reinstated at the discretion of the appointing authority. Subsequently, she appealed to the Office of the President, which granted her executive clemency on November 5, 1973, allowing for reinstatement at the discretion of the appointing authority.

Reinstatement Attempts and Abolition of Position

Petitioner sought reinstatement, but her position had been abolished under the reorganization staffing pattern of the Bureau of Foreign Trade, and she lacked the appropriate civil service eligibility. Her pleas to the Office of the President were denied.

Final Denial

On August 9, 1976, her final petition for review was denied, leading to the filing of this certiorari proceeding.

Issue:

  1. Whether the decision of respondent Presidential Assistant Ronaldo B. Zamora was responsive to petitioner's letter-petition dated July 10, 1973.
  2. Whether petitioner was denied procedural and substantive due process.
  3. Whether petitioner is entitled to reinstatement despite the abolition of her former position.

Ruling:

The Supreme Court dismissed the petition for lack of merit. The Court held that:

  1. The decision of respondent Zamora was responsive to petitioner's letter-petition.
  2. Petitioner was not denied procedural or substantive due process.
  3. Petitioner is not entitled to reinstatement as her position had been abolished, and such abolition was done in good faith.

Ratio:

  • (Unlock)

Jur is an AI-powered legal research platform in the Philippines for case digests, summaries, and jurisprudence. AI-generated content may contain inaccuracies; please verify independently.