Case Digest (G.R. No. 150178)
Facts:
Florian R. Gaoiran v. Hon. Angel C. Alcala et al., G.R. No. 150178, November 26, 2004, Supreme Court Second Division, Callejo, Sr., J., writing for the Court.Petitioner Florian R. Gaoiran, then Head Teacher III of the High School Department of Angadanan Agro-Industrial College (AAIC), was the subject of a letter-complaint dated October 29, 1997 by Edmond M. Castillejo, Administrative Officer II of the same school, accusing petitioner of mauling him on August 15, 1997; Castillejo appended a verified criminal complaint and sworn witness statements filed as Criminal Case No. 97-42. The Commission on Higher Education (CHED) referred the matter to its Legal Affairs Service for fact-finding.
Atty. Felina S. Dasig, then OIC of the Legal Affairs Service, conducted a fact-finding investigation and, finding a prima facie case, issued a Formal Charge and Order of Preventive Suspension dated July 27, 1998 directing petitioner to answer the charges and imposing a 90-day preventive suspension. Petitioner did not submit a written answer; he filed a certiorari petition challenging the preventive suspension in the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Cauayan, Isabela, but that petition was dismissed as moot because the suspension had already been served.
After petitioner sought reconsideration, Director Joel Voltaire V. Mayo of CHED’s Legal Affairs Service issued a Resolution dated February 20, 1999 dismissing the administrative complaint on the ground that Castillejo’s letter-complaint was not under oath. Unaware of Mayo’s action, CHED Chairman Angel C. Alcala issued a separate Resolution dated June 3, 1999 finding petitioner guilty of grave misconduct and conduct prejudicial to the best interest of the service and dismissing him from the service; petitioner received a copy on July 12, 1999.
Petitioner filed a petition for certiorari, prohibition and injunction in the RTC of Cauayan, which on February 15, 2000 declared Alcala’s June 3, 1999 Resolution null and void, reasoning that Mayo’s February 20, 1999 dismissal terminated the proceedings. On appeal, the Court of Appeals (CA) in CA-G.R. SP No. 61477 reversed on September 10, 2001, upheld Alcala’s dismissal order as valid, declared Mayo’s resolutio...(Pro-only)
Issues:
- Was the CHED action based on an invalid or inexistent complaint because Castillejo’s letter-complaint was not under oath?
- Did CHED (through its officers) commit grave abuse of discretion by issuing a dismissal order (Alcala’s June 3, 1999 Resolution) despite Director Mayo’s February 20, 1999 Resolution dismissing the administrative complaint?
- Was petitioner denied procedural due process because no formal investigation was conducted after the filing of the formal charge and/or because...(Pro-only)
Ruling:
- (Pro-only)
Ratio:
- (Pro-only)
Doctrine:
- (Pro-only)