Case Summary (G.R. No. 201535)
Facts of the Case
Following the incident, Mayor Lagman-Luistro received a letter of apology from Berces, citing the occasion of his 15th anniversary in public service. On August 31, 2011, the Mayor filed a complaint against him and his colleagues for violating local Memorandum Orders prohibiting drinking in government offices. Berces admitted to a lapse in judgment but insisted there was no intention to violate the rules. He was subsequently charged on September 9, 2011, with grave misconduct and conduct prejudicial to the service.
Initial Disciplinary Actions
The Mayor issued a dismissal order against Berces on February 13, 2012. This decision prompted Berces to appeal to the Civil Service Commission (CSC), which, on February 14, 2013, altered the original charges to simple misconduct, finding no malicious intent in Berces's actions. His punishment was modified to a six-month suspension instead of dismissal.
Motion for Reconsideration and Procedural Issues
Dissatisfied with the CSC's decision, the former Mayor Lagman-Luistro filed a motion for reconsideration, which was later withdrawn by her successor, Mayor Maria Josefa V. Demetriou. Despite this, the CSC, erroneously reinstated the original dismissal, citing the act of drinking in the office as a serious violation.
Appeal to the Court of Appeals
Berces challenged this decision through a Rule 65 petition for certiorari with the Court of Appeals, which dismissed his petition due to improper filing, ruling that he should have utilized a Rule 43 petition for review instead. This dismissal was further upheld in a subsequent resolution in January 2016.
Supreme Court Findings on Procedural Considerations
The Supreme Court identified significant procedural flaws in the Court of Appeals' dismissal of Berces's petition. The Court clarified that a certiorari petition is not the proper avenue for contesting CSC resolutions unless no other adequate remedy exists. However, in light of public interest and the nature of the claims raised, the Court decided that procedural technicalities should be relaxed.
Validity of Mayor’s Reconsideration Motion
The Court emphasized that Mayor Demetriou had the authority to withdraw the motion for reconsideration filed by her predecessor. Following her withdrawal, no valid appeal or motion for reconsideration existed, rendering the CSC Resolution upholding Berces's dismissal void.
Ruling on Misconduct Charges
The Supreme Court ruled that while Berces's actions demonstrated a lapse of judgment, they co
...continue readingCase Syllabus (G.R. No. 201535)
Background
- Petitioner Engr. Juan B. Berces served as the City Planning and Development Officer and Head of the City Planning and Development Office of the Local Government Unit of Tabaco City.
- On August 5, 2011, Berces and two colleagues were caught by Police Superintendent Joel T. Tada having a drinking session in their office after hours.
- Subsequently, Berces apologized to Mayor Cielo Krisel Lagman-Luistro, explaining the occasion was to celebrate his 15th anniversary in public service.
- On August 31, 2011, Mayor Lagman-Luistro filed a complaint against Berces, citing violations of LGU-Tabaco City’s Memorandum Orders prohibiting drinking in government offices.
Initial Proceedings
- In his Counter-Affidavit, Berces acknowledged a lapse in judgment but insisted there was no intention to violate policies.
- A Formal Charge was issued on September 9, 2011, accusing him of Grave Misconduct and Conduct Prejudicial to the Best Interest of the Service.
- Berces denied the charges, lamenting the lack of a preliminary investigation.
Dismissal and Appeal
- On February 13, 2012, Mayor Lagman-Luistro dismissed Berces from service, stating he was guilty of Grave Misconduct.
- Berces appealed the decision to the Civil Service Commission (CSC).
- On February 14, 2013, the CSC downgraded the charge to Simple Misconduct, citing that the incident was unrelated to his official duti