Case Digest (G.R. No. 233316)
Facts:
Susana P. Bauzon v. Municipality of Mangaldan, Pangasinan, G.R. No. 233316, November 04, 2020, the Supreme Court Third Division, Inting, J., writing for the Court. Petitioner Susana P. Bauzon was Municipal Treasurer of Mangaldan, Pangasinan; respondent is the Municipality of Mangaldan, represented by its mayor.In early 2012 the Commission on Audit (COA), through several Audit-Observation Memoranda (AOMs), found irregularities in the municipal payrolls and cash advance liquidations for 2011 and early 2012. The AOMs and subsequent Notices of Disallowance implicated Marilyn D. Gonzales (Assistant Municipal Treasurer), Evelyn L. Bernabe (Municipal Accountant), and petitioner as responsible officers; COA auditors found that amounts in obligation requests and payrolls had been altered and inflated to facilitate illegal "check padding." A portion of the disputed funds (P1,959,155.00) was later returned to the municipality.
On May 15, 2012, then Mayor Herminia A. Romero filed with the Civil Service Commission Regional Office No. I (CSCRO I) a complaint for Grave Misconduct, Gross Dishonesty, Disgraceful and Immoral Conduct, and Conduct Prejudicial to the Best Interest of the Service against Gonzales, Bernabe, petitioner and another officer. After preliminary investigation CSCRO I found prima facie cases against Gonzales, Bernabe and petitioner; a formal investigation followed. CSCRO I, in Decision No. 14-0066 dated June 26, 2014, found Gonzales, Bernabe and petitioner guilty of Grave Misconduct and ordered their dismissal, reasoning that petitioner, as Municipal Treasurer and head of the Treasurer's Office, failed to notice or stop repeated alterations and thus acquiesced in the irregularities.
Petitioner elevated the case to the Civil Service Commission (CSC) proper. In Decision No. 140931 dated December 5, 2014 the CSC affirmed CSCRO I, finding that petitioner had the duty to examine payrolls and verify cash advance vouchers and checks under her custody and supervision; her failure to diligently verify and the timing of her explanations (only after COA notices) supported a finding of grave misconduct. A motion for reconsideration was denied in Resolution No. 1500279 dated March 3, 2015.
Petitioner then filed a petition for review with the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. SP No. 139707. The Court of Appeals, in a Decision dated March 20, 2017, affirmed the CSC, holding that petitioner’s failure to exercise proper custody, management and verification of municipal funds reflected gross negligence and warranted dismissal; its denial of...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Whether the Court of Appeals committed reversible error in affirming the CSC decisions dismissing petitioner for grave misconduct.
- Whether petitioner is guilty of grave misconduct warranting dismissal from pu...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)