Case Digest (G.R. No. 167563)
Facts:
College of the Immaculate Conception v. National Labor Relations Commission and Atty. Marius F. Carlos, G.R. No. 167563, March 22, 2010, the Supreme Court Third Division, Peralta, J., writing for the Court.Petitioner College of the Immaculate Conception (the College), through its then-President Rev. Fr. Antonio A. Mangahas, Jr., appointed respondent Atty. Marius F. Carlos Acting Dean on June 1, 1995 and, by letter dated May 23, 1996, appointed him Dean of the Department of Business, Economics and Accountancy for the fixed term June 1, 1996 to May 31, 2000. By letter dated May 15, 2000 the College advised that upon expiration of his deanship Carlos would be appointed full‑time professor without diminution of salary; on June 1, 2000 he received eight teaching loads as full‑time professor.
Conflict arose when respondent sought overload pay (claiming six loads was regular) and the College refused, invoking its Faculty Manual definition of full‑time load. The College also required him to vacate the Dean’s office and answer charges for teaching at another school and for practicing law without prior permission. Respondent admitted teaching at Araullo University without written permission and said his law work was limited to one referral case; he protested that his demotion was unlawful.
The College offered on July 17, 2000 two alternatives: remain a full‑time professor but forego outside teaching/practice without prior written approval, or become part‑time (initial 15 units) with freedom to teach and practice but lose full‑time tenure. After further notices citing Section 16.8, CHED Memorandum No. 19, s. 1998, the College declined to assign respondent a teaching load for the succeeding semester. Respondent protested and on October 19, 2000 filed a complaint before Regional Arbitration Branch No. III (San Fernando, Pampanga) for unfair labor practice and illegal dismissal with claims for backwages and damages.
The Labor Arbiter (LA) issued a Decision dated February 14, 2001 declaring illegal dismissal, ordering reinstatement to his former position without loss of seniority, and awarding backwages, allowances, 13th‑month pay and moral and exemplary damages; a Writ of Execution followed on March 19, 2001. The College elected to reinstate respondent on its payroll only.
The National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC), Third Division, reversed the LA by Decision dated August 13, 2003: it set aside the LA’s decision, dismissed the complaint, but ordered reinstatement of Carlos as full‑time professor without backwages and deleted moral and exemplary damages. The NLRC denied petitioner’s motion for clarification on January 30, 2004.
Petitioner filed a petition for certiorari with the Court of Appeals (CA-G.R. SP No. 83321). The CA, in its Decision dated August 31, 2004 (Resolution March ...(Pro-only)
Issues:
- Must the respondent reimburse the salaries and benefits he received pursuant to the Labor Arbiter’s immediately executory reinstatement order after that order was reversed on appeal?
- Did petitioner prove fraud, partiality, or graft in the Labor Arbiter’s decision sufficient to overcome the presumption of regula...(Pro-only)
Ruling:
- (Pro-only)
Ratio:
- (Pro-only)
Doctrine:
- (Pro-only)