Case Digest (G.R. No. 71907)
Facts:
Edi-Staff Builders International, Inc. v. Honorable Vicente Leogardo, Jr., G.R. No. 71907, July 30, 1987, Supreme Court Second Division, Paras, J., writing for the Court.
Petitioner Edi-Staff Builders International, Inc. (petitioner) employed private respondent Teresita B. Bernardo beginning December 1, 1977, and through successive promotions and salary increases she rose from assistant consultant to senior supervising consultant, her last promotion effective September 1, 1980; she was terminated from employment on January 19, 1981.
On February 12, 1981 Bernardo filed a complaint for illegal dismissal with the National Capital Region office of the Ministry of Labor and Employment. Respondent Regional Director Severo Pukan (respondent director) took cognizance, called a conciliation conference, and required position papers. Petitioner submitted a 22-page position paper alleging various offenses and asserting loss of trust and confidence as grounds for dismissal.
On August 11, 1982 the respondent director rendered a decision declaring the dismissal illegal and ordered reinstatement with full back wages. On February 25, 1985 Deputy Minister Vicente Leogardo, Jr. (respondent deputy minister) affirmed the director’s decision but modified the award of back wages to a three-year period. Petitioner moved for reconsideration, arguing that the regional director lacked jurisdiction to summarily decide termination cases and that the complaint should have been referred to a labor arbiter under Article 217 of the Labor Code as amended by Batas Pambansa Blg. 130; the deputy minister denied reconsideration.
Petitioner then sought relief by filing this petition for certiorari under Rule 65 to annul and set aside the administrative decisions, pri...(Pro-only)
Issues:
- Did the respondent director and respondent deputy minister have jurisdiction to summarily investigate and decide the illegal dismissal complaint filed by Teresita B. Bernardo on February 12, 1981?
- Was the dismissal of Teresita B. Bernardo validly justified on the ground of loss of trust and confi...(Pro-only)
Ruling:
- (Pro-only)
Ratio:
- (Pro-only)
Doctrine:
- (Pro-only)