G.R. No. 139131 - Gonzales vs. Civil Service Commission

Petitioner Jesus R. Gonzales was employed as one of the two Utility Workers II at the Pharmacy Section of the Philippine Children’s Medical Center (PCMC), a government-owned and controlled corporation.
His work schedule required him to render services to patients and the public from 6:00 A.M. to 10:00 P.M., seven days a week.

On March 2, 1998, petitioner began absenting himself without approved leave (AWOL) and without providing any explanation to his superiors.
Despite his absence, petitioner was observed on several occasions within the premises of PCMC, including areas such as the Budget Office, Billing and Cashier, and Personnel Clinic.

On March 5, 1998, the Human Resources Management Officer III, Ms. Jara Corazon O. Ehera, issued a letter-notice directing petitioner to report for work within three (3) days, warning of his possible drop from the rolls if he failed to comply.
Despite the issuance of this notice, petitioner did not report for work, raising concerns about his commitment and responsibility.

On March 16, 1998, Dr. Corazon D. Rivera, officer-in-charge of the Pharmacy Section, reported petitioner’s irresponsibility and lack of concern for his work to the Executive Director of PCMC, recommending that he be dropped from the rolls.
Consequently, PCMC executed the action by dropping petitioner from the rolls effective March 20, 1998.

Petitioner, aggrieved by his dismissal, appealed to the Civil Service Commission (CSC). In Resolution No. 98-2359 dated September 8, 1998, the CSC upheld PCMC’s action, noting that although the separation was not disciplinary, petitioner could be re-employed at the discretion of the appointing authority.
Petitioner’s subsequent motion for reconsideration by the CSC was denied. When he filed a petition for review in the Court of Appeals (CA), his petition was dismissed for failure to comply with Section 6(c), Rule 43 of the Revised Rules of Court, specifically for not attaching certified true copies of the material records and supporting papers.
Even after filing a Motion for Reconsideration and Compliance, where he eventually attached the required documents, the CA reaffirmed its dismissal.

Whether the dismissal of petitioner’s appeal by the CA, based on the failure to attach certified true copies of the requisite documents, constituted a grave error given that substantial compliance may have been achieved through his subsequent filing.
Whether dismissing an appeal merely on technical grounds is consistent with the policy of encouraging the merits-based hearing of cases.

Whether the factual and legal basis existed for respondent PCMC to drop petitioner from the rolls for his alleged absences without leave.
Whether petitioner was denied due process, particularly on the basis that he received the return-to-work notice too late and was even prevented from reporting for duty despite his alleged willingness to comply.