Municipality of La Libertad v. Penaflor
REITERATIONFacts
The Antecedents: Respondent Judith C. Penaflor, a Rural Health Midwife employed by the Municipality of La Libertad, Negros Oriental for approximately twenty years, applied for a 15-day leave of absence commencing November 13, 1995. Despite having accumulated over a year in unused leave credits and receiving a recommendation for approval from her superior, she began her leave without explicit confirmation of its approval. Subsequently, on December 1, 1995, the Municipal Mayor notified her of her termination from service effective November 13, 1995, citing her absence from duty without an approved leave. Procedural History: Respondent's appeal for reconsideration of the termination was denied. She then appealed to the Civil Service Commission (CSC), which, by Resolution No. 980207, set aside the Mayor's decision. The CSC found that the Municipality failed to issue a Return-to-Work Order, a prerequisite for dropping an employee from the rolls for unauthorized absences of less than thirty days, as mandated by CSC Memorandum Circular No. 12, s. 1994. Consequently, the CSC ordered respondent's reinstatement. The Municipality appealed to the Court of Appeals (CA), which affirmed the CSC's resolution. The CA decision became final and executory. Upon reinstatement, respondent sought payment of back salaries, which the CSC granted by Resolution No. 002737. The CSC denied the Municipality's motion for reconsideration, leading the Municipality to elevate these resolutions to the CA. The Petition: The Municipality of La Libertad, represented by its Mayor, filed a Petition for Review on Certiorari with the Supreme Court, assailing the CA's Decision. The Municipality argued that former Mayor Napoleon N. Camero should be held personally liable for the backwages, asserting that he acted arbitrarily, beyond his legal authority, and out of personal spite in terminating respondent's services. The Municipality contended that holding the municipality liable would cause economic hardship. The Supreme Court, in its review, found no proof of malice or bad faith on the part of former Mayor Camero and affirmed the CA's ruling that the Municipality is liable for the respondent's back salaries and other monetary benefits.
Issue(s)
Whether the Municipality of La Libertad is liable for the backwages and other monetary benefits of respondent Judith C. Penaflor. Whether former Mayor Napoleon N. Camero should be held personally liable for the backwages and other monetary benefits of respondent.
Ruling
The petition is denied. The Municipality of La Libertad is liable for the backwages and other monetary benefits of respondent Judith C. Penaflor.
Ratio Decidendi
On the liability of the Municipality of La Libertad for backwages: The Court reiterated the principle that in the absence of evidence to the contrary, the presumption that public officials discharged their official duties in good faith remains. The petitioner failed to prove malice on the part of former Mayor Camero, which is the doing of a wrongful act intentionally without just cause or excuse, or a state of mind that prompts a conscious violation of the law to the prejudice of another. The former mayor's comments on respondent's appeal did not infer malice; rather, they negated it. The argument that the former mayor acted without the authority of the Sangguniang Bayan was also dismissed. Under Republic Act No. 7160 (Local Government Code), the power to appoint generally includes the power to remove, except in specific instances not applicable here. Since respondent was not a head of department or office, former Mayor Camero did not need the concurrence of the Sangguniang Bayan to terminate her services, as he was empowered by Section 444(5) of the Local Government Code to appoint officials whose salaries are paid out of municipal funds and whose appointments are not otherwise provided for by law. Therefore, the municipality is liable for the backwages and benefits. On the personal liability of former Mayor Napoleon N. Camero: The Court found no basis to hold former Mayor Camero personally liable. While a public official may be liable in his personal capacity for acts done with malice or in bad faith or beyond the scope of his authority, the petitioner failed to present proof of such malice or bad faith. The CSC's reversal of the Mayor's decision and order for reinstatement did not, in itself, prove that he acted arbitrarily or in bad faith. The petitioner's reliance on cases like Salcedo v. Rama and Correa v. CFI of Bulacan was misplaced as the factual circumstances and the required proof of malice or bad faith were not met in this case. The petitioner merely proffered allegations without substantial evidence to support its claim that the former mayor acted out of personal spite or beyond his legal duty.
Main Doctrine
A municipality is liable for backwages and other monetary benefits of an illegally dismissed employee if the mayor acted arbitrarily or in bad faith, and the municipality fails to prove such malice or bad faith. The municipality cannot escape liability by attributing the wrongful dismissal solely to the mayor, especially when the dismissal was found to be without legal basis and the municipality failed to discharge the onus of proving the mayor's malice or bad faith.