Title
Campol vs. Balao-as
Case
G.R. No. 197634
Decision Date
Nov 28, 2016
Campol, illegally dismissed as SB Secretary, challenged termination. SC ruled for reinstatement and full backwages, upholding security of tenure despite his PAO employment.
Font Size:

Case Digest (G.R. No. 197634)

Facts:

Background of the Case

  • Julius B. Campol (Campol) served as the Secretary to the Sangguniang Bayan (SB) of the Municipality of Boliney, Abra, since 1999. He held the position in a permanent capacity with Salary Grade 24.

Dismissal from Service

  • After the 2004 elections, Ronald S. Balao-as (Mayor) and Dominador J. Sianen (Vice-Mayor) assumed office in July 2004. Shortly thereafter, the SB passed a resolution terminating Campol's position on the grounds of absence without approved leave from August 1, 2004, to September 30, 2004.
  • The resolution was referred to the Sangguniang Panlalawigan (SP), which sought the opinion of the Civil Service Commission (CSC)-Abra. CSC-Abra advised that Campol could not be removed as he was protected by the Administrative Code. The SP and the Department of Interior and Local Government (DILG)-Abra supported this position.
  • Despite this, Vice-Mayor Sianen issued Memorandum Order No. 001, Series of 2004, dropping Campol from the rolls.

Legal Proceedings

  • Campol challenged the memorandum before the CSC-CAR, which ruled in his favor. However, Sianen appealed to the CSC, which reversed the decision and upheld Campol's dismissal.
  • Campol filed a petition for review before the Court of Appeals (CA), contesting the allegations of unauthorized absences. He provided evidence, including salary receipts and a logbook of SB meetings, to prove his attendance. He also argued that his sick leave application was denied to fabricate his absences.
  • The CA ruled that Campol was illegally dismissed but refused to order his reinstatement, citing his employment with the Public Attorney's Office (PAO) since October 2005. The CA also limited his backwages to the period from his dismissal until October 2005.

Petition to the Supreme Court

  • Campol filed a Petition for Review on Certiorari, challenging the CA's refusal to order his reinstatement and the limitation of his backwages. He argued that his employment with PAO was out of necessity due to his wife's death and financial hardship.

Issue:

  • The sole issue before the Supreme Court was whether Campol is entitled to reinstatement and full backwages from the time of his illegal dismissal until his actual reinstatement.

Ruling:

  • The Supreme Court ruled in favor of Campol. It held that he is entitled to reinstatement to his former position as SB Secretary, provided he resigns from his current employment with PAO. The Court also awarded him full backwages from the time of his illegal dismissal until his reinstatement.

Ratio:

  1. Reinstatement as a Right:

    • The Constitution guarantees security of tenure to civil service employees. An employee illegally dismissed is entitled to reinstatement, regardless of whether they have obtained other employment during the pendency of the case.
    • The Court rejected the CA's reasoning that Campol's employment with PAO barred his reinstatement. It emphasized that accepting other employment does not constitute abandonment of the right to reinstatement.
  2. Full Backwages:

    • An illegally dismissed employee is entitled to full backwages from the time of dismissal until actual reinstatement. The Court clarified that there is no legal basis for limiting backwages to a specific period or deducting earnings from other employment.
    • The Court overruled prior cases that imposed a five-year cap on backwages, aligning civil service jurisprudence with labor law principles that mandate full backwages without deductions.
  3. Doctrinal Shift:

    • The Court reaffirmed the doctrine in earlier cases (e.g., Tan v. Gimenez, Tañada v. Legaspi) that an illegally dismissed employee retains the right to reinstatement and full backwages. It rejected the contrary rulings in Ginson v. Municipality of Murcia and Regis v. Osmeña, which imposed conditions on reinstatement and backwages.
    • The Court emphasized that the constitutional right to security of tenure must be upheld without compromise, and any illegal dismissal must be fully remedied through reinstatement and full backwages.
  4. Policy Considerations:

    • The Court highlighted that limiting reinstatement or backwages would penalize employees for being illegally dismissed and force them to choose between pursuing their rights or finding alternative employment. This would undermine the constitutional guarantee of security of tenure.
    • The Court also noted that full backwages serve as a penalty for employers who illegally dismiss employees, ensuring accountability and deterrence.

Conclusion:

  • The Supreme Court granted Campol's petition, ordering his reinstatement as SB Secretary and awarding him full backwages from the time of his illegal dismissal until his actual reinstatement. The Court emphasized that the constitutional right to security of tenure must be upheld without compromise, and any illegal dismissal must be fully remedied through reinstatement and full backwages.


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.