Abellera v. City of Baguio
REITERATIONFacts
The Antecedents: Roman D. Abellera, cashier in the City Treasurer's Office of Baguio, was charged administratively for "Dishonesty and Gross Negligence in the Performance of Official Duties" for paying forged treasury warrants and/or checks, causing a loss of P8,750.48 to the city. He was suspended preventively and later dismissed from service on July 10, 1961, after the Commissioner of Civil Service found him guilty. Procedural History: The Commissioner of Civil Service found Abellera guilty and ordered his resignation effective the day after his last day of duty, with prejudice to reinstatement in positions involving money or property responsibility. Abellera appealed to the Civil Service Board of Appeals (CSBA), which modified the ruling by reducing the penalty to a two-month suspension without pay, affirming the decision in all other respects. Abellera was reinstated on November 11, 1963. The Petition: Abellera filed a mandamus action against the City of Baguio and its officials, alleging he was not reinstated to his former position as cashier and was not paid his salary, including back salaries from July 10, 1961. He sought reinstatement to his former position with back salaries, moral and exemplary damages, and attorney's fees. The respondents contended that Abellera was not reinstated as cashier due to the cancellation of his bond, recommended by the City Treasurer following the administrative ruling. They also alleged he was offered a position as Special Deputy. The lower court ordered the respondents to pay Abellera's salary from July 10, 1961, to November 10, 1963 (less two months' pay), and to reinstate him to a position not involving custody of funds or property. Both parties appealed.
Issue(s)
Whether the City of Baguio and its officials are liable for back salaries to Abellera from July 10, 1961, to November 10, 1963. Whether Abellera should be reinstated to his former position as cashier. Whether Abellera is entitled to damages.
Ruling
The Supreme Court affirmed the decision of the lower court in part, ordering the payment of back salaries from July 10, 1961, to November 10, 1963, less the two-month suspension penalty, and the reinstatement of Abellera to a position not involving the custody of funds or property. The Court denied the claims for damages.
Ratio Decidendi
On the award of back salaries: The Court held that the payment of back salaries corresponding to the period of suspension is proper not only when an employee is found innocent but also when the suspension is unjustified. In this case, Abellera's dismissal before the Commissioner's decision became final and while an appeal was pending was premature. The subsequent reduction of the penalty by the CSBA to a two-month suspension, while Abellera was deprived of work for over two years, rendered his extended separation from service unjustified. To deny him back salaries would mean he would suffer a suspension longer than that meted by the CSBA. The Court clarified that Republic Act 2260 (Revised Civil Service Act) superseded provisions of the Revised Administrative Code regarding suspension and payment of back salaries, removing the need for department head authorization. On reinstatement to the position of cashier: The Court sustained the lower court's ruling denying reinstatement to the specific position of cashier. Considering that Abellera's own actions, found negligent by the CSBA, led to the city's financial loss, his dismissal could not be entirely attributed to malice or bad faith. The Court accepted the respondents' explanation that their actions were for the best interest of the city government, and thus, reinstatement to a position involving the custody of funds or property was not warranted. On damages: The Court affirmed the lower court's denial of damages. It found no bad faith attributable to any of the city officials, including the City Treasurer, and reiterated the principle that municipal corporations cannot be held civilly liable for the misfeasance or malfeasance of their officers or employees. The Court also noted that the exempting provision in the City of Baguio's charter regarding failure or negligence of officials in enforcing laws was not applicable as the issue was not negligence but an unjustified action by the respondents.
Main Doctrine
The payment of back salaries corresponding to the period an employee is suspended may be decreed not only if the employee is found innocent of the charges but also when the suspension is unjustified. Premature dismissal from service before the finality of an administrative decision, especially when an appeal is pending, constitutes an unjustified suspension.