Title
Orcullo vs. Gervacio, Jr.
Case
G.R. No. 134104
Decision Date
Sep 14, 1999
A city councilor challenged the Ombudsman's order to pay back wages, claiming lack of jurisdiction and personal liability. The Supreme Court ruled in her favor, annulling the order and clarifying the Ombudsman's limited authority over money claims.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 134104)

Relevant Facts

Nenita R. Orcullo was elected as a City Councilor in Davao City in May 1995 and chaired the Committee on Women Welfare and Development. In September 1995, the city government appointed Virginia Yap Morales as the team leader for a study on women's welfare. However, due to financial constraints, Orcullo suspended the project in 1996, leading Morales to seek back pay for her services. In February 1998, the Deputy Ombudsman ordered Orcullo to pay Morales P70,800 in back wages, arguing that Morales had worked as a consultant despite the project being suspended.

Procedural History and Essentials of the Case

Orcullo contested the Deputy Ombudsman's order on the grounds that no employer-employee relationship existed and that the Ombudsman had no authority to issue the order. After her motion for reconsideration was denied, a graft investigator recommended filing a case against Orcullo under the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act. Orcullo subsequently filed a petition for certiorari against the Ombudsman's orders.

Jurisdictional Issues

The central issue was whether the Deputy Ombudsman had jurisdiction to order Orcullo to personally pay Morales. The Court found that claims for money against public officials of Davao City fall under the jurisdiction of the appropriate courts or the city government, but not the Office of the Ombudsman. The Ombudsman’s power to request assistance from government agencies does not extend to ordering payments for money claims.

Authority and Abuse of Discretion

The Court observed that the Deputy Ombudsman overstepped his authority by both ordering payment and approving the filing of a case against Orcullo. The Court emphasized that Orcullo acted within her capacity as a local legislator and did not exhibit bad faith in her refusal to pay Morales, considering Morales’s appointment was not under Orcullo’s direct employment. Thus, the grounds of th

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster, building context before diving into full texts. AI-powered analysis, always verify critical details.