Social Security System v. Commission on Audit
REITERATIONFacts
1. The Antecedents: The Social Security System (SSS) granted a Collective Negotiation Agreement (CNA) incentive of P20,000.00 to each eligible employee. This included a counterpart benefit for employees not covered by the collective negotiating unit, such as confidential, coterminous, and contractual employees, lawyers, and executives. Upon post-audit, the SSS Supervising Auditor disallowed the counterpart benefit, totaling P6,180,000.00, for violating provisions that prohibit such benefits for high-level and confidential employees, as these benefits arise from membership in the rank-and-file collective negotiating unit. 2. Procedural History: The SSS appealed the disallowance to the Commission on Audit's (COA) Legal Services Sector (LSS), which denied the appeal. The SSS then filed a petition for review with the COA Commission Proper En Banc, which also denied the petition and affirmed the disallowance. The SSS filed a motion for reconsideration, which was subsequently denied by the COA Commission Proper En Banc. Following this denial, the SSS sought clarification from the COA regarding the resolution and meeting minutes, to which the COA responded that the denial notice was in the prescribed format and that the resolution was copied verbatim. 3. The Petition: The Social Security System (SSS) filed a petition for certiorari under Rule 64 of the Revised Rules of Court, seeking to reverse the COA's decisions. The SSS argued that the COA's decision affirming the disallowance and its resolution denying the motion for reconsideration were contrary to facts, laws, and fair play. Furthermore, the SSS contended that the COA's refusal to disclose the purported resolution and meeting minutes violated due process and constituted grave abuse of discretion. The COA, in its comment, argued that the petition was filed out of time and that its decisions were in accordance with law, rules, and jurisprudence, asserting that the SSS lacked legal and factual bases for granting the counterpart CNA benefits to employees outside the negotiating unit.
Issue(s)
Whether the petition for certiorari was filed within the reglementary period. Whether the Commission on Audit (COA) committed grave abuse of discretion in denying the SSS's motion for reconsideration through the assailed Notice. Whether the COA committed grave abuse of discretion in upholding the disallowance of the grant of CNA incentives to non-members of the negotiating unit, and the liability to return disallowed amounts.
Ruling
The petition is DISMISSED. The 8 May 2014 Decision and the 20 November 2014 Resolution of the Commission on Audit in Decision No. 2014-069 are AFFIRMED.
Ratio Decidendi
On the timeliness of the petition: The Court ruled that the petition was filed out of time. The 30-day reglementary period to file a petition for certiorari under Rule 64 of the Rules of Court, which began on May 15, 2014 (date of receipt of COA Decision), was interrupted by the SSS's motion for reconsideration filed on June 11, 2014. This left only 3 days, extended to 5 days by the Rule, to file the petition after notice of denial. Since the SSS received the Notice of denial on February 4, 2015, the petition should have been filed by February 9, 2015. However, the petition was filed on March 20, 2015, which is 39 days late. Even if the Court considered the COA's letter of March 12, 2015, as the reckoning point, the petition would still be late as it should have been filed by March 17, 2015. On the denial of the motion for reconsideration: The Court found that the COA did not commit grave abuse of discretion in denying the SSS's motion for reconsideration through the Notice dated February 4, 2015. The Court clarified that the Notice was in the format prescribed by COA Resolution No. 2013-018, which amends Section 12, Rule X of the 2009 Revised Rules of Procedure of the COA. This format is valid for informing parties of the denial of a motion for reconsideration for failure to raise new matters or sufficient grounds. The SSS's attempt to disregard this officially prescribed notice and rely on a subsequent letter highlights their awareness of the petition's tardiness. On the disallowance of CNA benefits to non-members and the liability to return disallowed amounts: Assuming the petition was timely filed, the Court held that the COA did not commit grave abuse of discretion in affirming the disallowance. The COA correctly applied Presidential Decree No. 1597, Executive Order No. 180, Administrative Order No. 103, PSLMC Resolutions Nos. 4 and 2, Administrative Order No. 135, and DBM Budget Circular 2006-1. These laws and regulations consistently limit CNA benefits to rank-and-file employees who are members of the negotiating unit. High-level managerial, confidential, coterminous, policy-making, and contractual employees are explicitly excluded as they are not eligible to join labor organizations for collective negotiation. The Court also noted that the fixed amount of P20,000.00 for counterpart CNA incentives was contrary to DBM Budget Circular No. 2006-1, which requires the incentive amount to be dependent on cost-cutting measures specified in the CNA. The Court affirmed that the certifying and approving officers, as well as the individual employees who received the disallowed amounts, are liable to return them. This is based on various provisions of the Administrative Code of 1987, PD 1177, and the Government Auditing Code. The presumption of good faith for approving and certifying officers is overcome when an explicit law or regulation is violated, as was the case here. Recipient employees are liable based on the principle of solutio indebiti as they were disqualified from receiving the incentives, and their retention would cause prejudice to the government.
Main Doctrine
The grant of Collective Negotiation Agreement (CNA) incentives is exclusively for rank-and-file employees who are members of the negotiating unit. High-level managerial, confidential, coterminous, and policy-making employees are not entitled to such benefits as they are not eligible to join labor organizations for collective negotiation purposes. Furthermore, the petition for certiorari was filed out of time, rendering the assailed COA decision final and executory.