Case Digest (A.M. No. 02-12-01-SC)
Facts:
The matter originated from two letters from Undersecretary Mario L. Relampagos of the Department of Budget and Management (DBM) informing the Court of DBM’s action to disallow certain lump sum gratuity claims by the heirs of two judges who died while in actual service. These claims were based on the Court’s Resolution dated 30 September 2003 in A.M. No. 02-12-01-SC, which granted lump sum Permanent Physical Disability benefits to heirs of Justices and Judges who die while in the service, subject to stated exceptions.In the case of Judge Melvyn U. Calvan, the Court approved the heirs’ application but DBM disallowed an “additional five-year” lump sum; in the case of Judge Emmanuel R. Real, the Court approved an additional five-year lump sum after reconsideration, but DBM again disallowed it. The only question presented was whether DBM had a basis to deny FMBO’s request for the release of funds corresponding to the additional five-year benefits, notwithstanding the Court’s prior
Case Digest (A.M. No. 02-12-01-SC)
Facts:
- Initiation of the administrative matter
- The Honorable Chief Justice received two (2) letters from Undersecretary Mario L. Relampagos of the Department of Budget and Management (DBM).
- The letters advised the Court of DBM’s action to disallow a five-year lump sum gratuity separately claimed by the heirs of the late Judge Melvyn U. Calvan and Judge Emmanuel R. Real under the Court’s Resolution dated 30 September 2003 in A.M. No. 02-12-01-SC.
- The Court’s Resolution in A.M. No. 02-12-01-SC resolved, pursuant to the Court’s mandates of fiscal autonomy under Section 3 and administrative supervision over all courts and personnel under Section 6 of Article VIII of the Constitution, to grant lump sum Permanent Physical Disability benefits provided for in Sections 2 and 3 of Republic Act No. 910, as amended, to the heirs of Justices and Judges, including judiciary officials with the rank, salary and privileges of such Justices and Judges, who die while in the service regardless of the cause of death.
- The Resolution in A.M. No. 02-12-01-SC excluded suicide or death where the Justice or Judge himself was the proximate cause of the attack or assault resulting in his death.
- The Resolution in A.M. No. 02-12-01-SC also imposed conditions “xxx” (as stated in the text).
- The claim for the late Judge Melvyn U. Calvan
- Judge Calvan served as Presiding Judge of the Municipal Circuit Trial Court in Bangui, Ilocos Norte when he died on 16 November 2003 due to cardio-respiratory arrest.
- At the time of death, Judge Calvan had rendered total government service of twenty-one (21) years, two (2) months and one (1) day.
- Of that total, sixteen (16) years, three (3) months and six (6) days were spent in the Judiciary.
- After his death, specifically on 12 February 2004, his widow, Dr. Susana B. Calvan, wrote the Honorable Presbitero J. Velasco, Jr., Court Administrator, requesting entitlement to benefits under Republic Act No. 910, in conjunction with the Court’s Resolution of 30 September 2003 in A.M. No. 02-12-01-SC.
- On 17 March 2004, the Court approved the application through a Resolution in A.M. No. 11445-Ret.
- The Fiscal Management and Budget Office (FMBO) of the Court sent DBM Secretary Emilia T. Boncodin a request for the issuance of a Special Allotment Release Order (SARO).
- The SARO request sought funding for the payment of terminal leave and retirement gratuity benefits of Supreme Court and lower court officials and employees, including those pertaining to the late Judge Calvan.
- DBM, through Undersecretary Mario L. Relampagos, responded with a letter dated 15 July 2004 to the Chief Justice.
- DBM disallowed the amount of P2,611.50 representing the additional five (5) years lump sum gratuity of the late Judge Melvyn U. Calvan under A.M. No. 02-12-01-SC.
- DBM’s stated reason was that Section 2 of Republic Act No. 910, as amended, treats death while in actual service and retirement due to permanent physical disability as distinct and separate circumstances.
- The claim for the late Judge Emmanuel R. Real
- Judge Emmanuel R. Real served as Presiding Judge of the Regional Trial at Ligao, Albay, Branch II when he died on 25 February 2002 of cardiac arrest and multiple organ failure or complications due to multiple myeloma.
- At the time of death, Judge Real had rendered total government service of thirty-two (32) years, seven (7) months and twenty-three (23) days.
- Of that total, ten (10) years and twenty-eight (28) days were in the Judiciary.
- On 11 March 2002, his widow, Mrs. Elena N. Real, and their four (4) children filed a claim for permanent total disability retirement benefits.
- The Court denied the claim through a Resolution dated 3 June 2002 in A.M. No. 10821-Ret.
- The denial was based on the late judge’s failure to submit the application for permanent total disability retirement benefits during his incumbency for the purpose of medical evaluation.
- In the same 3 June 2002 Resolution, the Court treated and approved the application as a claim for retirement/gratuity benefits under Section 2 of Republic Act No. 910, as amended, effective February 25, 2002 (death), subject to the availability of funds and usual clearance requirements.
- Mrs. Real sought reconsideration of the 3 June 2002 Resolution and claimed entitlement under the Court’s Resolution of 30 September 2003 in A.M. No. 02-12-01-SC.
- In a Resolution dated 22 March 2004, the Court approved the claim and ordered the payment to Judge Real’s heirs of additional gratuity benefits of five-year lump sum to complete the ten-year lump sum they were entitled to under A.M. No. 02-12-01-SC.
- FMBO then sent DBM a request for the release of funds to cover the additional five-year lump sum benefits due the heirs of the late Judge.
- DBM, through Undersecretary Relampagos, “virtually denied” the request in his letter dated 19 July 2004 to the Chief Justice.
- DBM represented that Judge Real died while ...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Whether DBM had authority to disallow payment of the additional five-year lump sum gratuity under A.M. No. 02-12-01-SC to heirs of Justices and Judges who died while in actual service
- Whether DBM could, under its executive mandate to ensure compliance with law in disbursements, review and substitute its own interpretation of the Court’s Resolution.
- Whether DBM could treat death while in actual service and retirement due to permanent physical disability as distinct and separate circumstances, thereby denying the additional five-year lump sum gratuity ordered by the ...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)