GALINDO v. COA

ANNALIZA J. GALINDO, et al, Petitioners, - versus- COMMISSION ON AUDIT, Respondent. 

G. R. No. 210788

January 10, 2017

FACTS:

         This is a petition for certiorari filed by COA Auditors/personnel  who were found guilty by the Commission on Audit of Grave Misconduct and Violation of Reasonable Office Rules and Regulations.

     

         COA State Auditor Annaliza Galindo and  State Auditing Examiner Erlinda Pinto were assigned at the MWSS. As it has been a practice in the MWSS, COA personnel assigned in this Office are entitled to benefits that the MWSS personnel are receiving.

          On June 2, 2008, the former MWSS Administrator Allado wrote to the then COA Chairman Reynaldo Villar on the issue concerning the two COA personnel assigned in their office, were likewise receiving benefits and bonuses parallel to that of the MWSS personnel. And the said benefits and bonuses were not supported with vouchers and payrolls.

          On July 21, 2009 Chairman Villar issued an Office  Order and constituted a team from COA's Fraud Audit and Investigation Office- Legal Services Section for a fact finding Investigation. As a result of the investigation, Chairman Villar issued Letter Charges for Grave Misconduct and Violation of Office Rules and Regulation.

          The fact finding Investigating team Report are as follows :

           1.)  In 2005-2006 COA -MWSS personnel received amounts representing bonuses and other benefits.

           2.) From 1999-2003 - a total of P 1, 171, 885.00 were received by COA-MWSS representing the bonuses and benefits.

           3.) Atty. Cabibihan and ten of his staff availed of the car loan assistance of MEWF of which they only pay 40% of the purchase price by way of loan and payable to the MEWF while the balance of 60%  was paid by MEWF hence constituting it as fringe benefits.

          After the careful investigation on the matter concerning the two (2) COA-MWSS personnel, Chairman Villar, on  July 30, 2010, issued letter charges for Grave Misconduct and Violation of Reasonable Office Rules and Regulations to the petitioners Galindo and Pinto along with other COA-MWSS personnel .

          COA ruled that the petitioners, Galindo and Pinto were guilty of the charges against them. They were ordered to refund the amounts they received, the unauthorized bonuses and allowances. A penalty of suspension without compensation was imposed to them.

ISSUES:

      Whether or not the Commission erred in rendering its decision against the petitioners under the Rules and Regulations of the commission.

RULING:

       The Court ruled , the DISMISSAL of the Petition filed by the two COA-.MWSS personnel on the ground that an appeal on matters of administrative disciplinary cases which the Commission decided will be filed in the Civil Service Commission not a Petition for Certiorari under Rule 64 .

        The Commission did not erroneously acted on the case filed against the petitioners. The Commission has its independence and integrity and has its own Rules and Regulations on disciplinary and administrative cases.

       The Supreme Court can only act on matters of administrative cases involving legal matters.

      The Petitioners likewise failed to file its petition beyond the  reglementary period within which to file its petition. The decision rendered was already final and executory at the time the petition was filed.

      Petitioners questioned the quantum of evidence which were substantially produced by the prosecution and caused the establishment of their administrative liability.