Case Digest (G.R. No. 253218)
Facts:
Department of Science and Technology (DOST) Officials and Personnel represented by Sec. Fortunato De La Pena, in his capacity as Secretary, petitioner, vs. Commission on Audit, respondent, G.R. No. 253218, February 04, 2025, the Supreme Court En Banc, Inting, J., writing for the Court. The petitioners (through the DOST Legal Division) sought certiorari under Rule 64, in relation to Rule 65, assailing COA Commission Proper Decision No. 2014-381 dated December 17, 2014, its Resolution dated December 23, 2015 denying reconsideration, and Resolution No. 2020-036 dated January 21, 2020 dismissing relief sought by a former DOST Secretary.The dispute originated from Notice of Disallowance (ND) No. 09-002-101-(05-08) dated April 16, 2009 and COA NGS Cluster-B Decision No. 2010-003 dated May 17, 2010, which disallowed step increment differentials amounting to PHP 1,031,928.50 granted to 101 (later treated as 103) named science and technology (S & T) personnel for January 1, 2005 to December 31, 2008. The COA held several DOST officers (including Assistant Secretary Bravo and Director Fontanilla) liable for participating in the disbursements. The ND was received by DOST Accounting on April 16, 2009.
DOST Secretary Estrella Alabastro sought reconsideration and appealed to the COA Cluster-B Director; the cluster director denied the appeal in NGS Cluster-B Decision No. 2010-003. Secretary Alabastro then filed a Petition for Review with the COA Proper on July 2, 2010. During pendency, Secretaries changed (Montejo, later De La Pena). The COA Proper affirmed the cluster decision in Decision No. 2014-381 on December 17, 2014. A Motion for Reconsideration by Asec. Santos and Engr. Reyes (filed May 27, 2015) was dismissed by COA Proper on December 23, 2015 as untimely; a later letter by Sec. Montejo (April 22, 2016) invoking this Court’s decision in Cawad, et al. v. Sec. Abad, et al. (764 Phil. 705 (2015)) was treated as a prohibited second motion and dismissed in Resolution No. 2020-036.
The present Petition for Certiorari was filed by Sec. Fortunato De La Pena on September 17, 2020. He argued that step increment and longevity pay under Republic Act No. 8439 are distinct and may be received concurrently, that DBM Circular No. 2004-04...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Was the Petition for Certiorari timely filed, or had the COA decision become final?
- Did the COA commit grave abuse of discretion in disallowing step increment differentials that were concurrently received with longevity pay for S & T personnel from January 1, 2005 to...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)