Title
Maritime Industry Authority vs. Commission on Audit
Case
G.R. No. 185812
Decision Date
Jan 13, 2015
MARINA's grant of allowances disallowed by COA, deemed integrated into standardized salaries under RA 6758; SC upheld COA, citing no legal basis and prohibition on double compensation.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 185812)

Petitioner and Respondent

  • Petitioner: Maritime Industry Authority (Marina)
  • Respondent: Commission on Audit (COA)

Key Dates

  • July 1, 1989: Effective date of Republic Act No. 6758 to standardize salaries and allowances.
  • February 10, 2000: Memorandum from Marina to then-President Joseph Estrada recommending the restoration of allowances.
  • October 16, 2000: Date the memorandum was allegedly approved by President Estrada.
  • January 2001: The month when allowances were granted based on the alleged approval.

Applicable Law

The applicable law is Republic Act No. 6758, known as the "Compensation and Position Classification Act of 1989," which standardizes salary rates and outlines the integration of allowances into government employees' compensation.

Factual Background

Marina's officers and employees initially received various allowances and incentives, which were disallowed by the COA on the grounds that such payments constituted double compensation, as defined by Article IX(B), Section 8 of the 1987 Constitution. The COA referenced Section 12 of Republic Act No. 6758, which integrates allowances into the standardized salaries unless specifically exempted. Notices of disallowance were issued by the Resident Auditor, leading to a series of appeals and petitions challenging these decisions.

Legal Interpretation of Section 12

Section 12 of Republic Act No. 6758 mandates that all government allowances, with certain specified exceptions, are considered included within the standardized salary rates. The specific exemptions mentioned include representation and transportation allowances, among others. Importantly, additional compensation, whether in cash or kind, must be authorized and is subject to criteria set by the Department of Budget and Management (DBM).

Grant and Disallowance of Allowances

Following the issuance of National Compensation Circular Nos. 56 and 59 by the DBM, which set parameters for implementing the compensation structure, Marina discontinued various allowances. However, in February 2000, Marina sought to restore previously provided allowances in light of alleged inflation and difficulties in retaining qualified personnel. The BOA’s approval of this restoration was argued by Marina to provide a legitimate basis for resuming the allowances.

COA's Findings

The COA maintained that the allowances granted were already integrated into the salary rates and that the alleged presidential approval of the restoration was not equivalent to a legal basis under the Constitution for the receipt of additional compensation. The COA also noted that Marina failed to produce the original memorandum, undermining its credibility.

Judicial Review and Standards for Certiorari

The Supreme Court emphasized that a certiorari petition challenging COA decisions could proceed only if grave abuse of discretion, lacking jurisdiction, or ar

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster—building context before diving into full texts.