GR 84378; (July, 1991) (Digest)
G.R. No. 84378 ; July 4, 1991
NENITA L. LEANO, petitioner, vs. HON. EUFEMIO C. DOMINGO, Chairman, Commission on Audit, et al., respondents.
FACTS
Petitioner Nenita L. Leano was designated Acting Cashier I of the Bureau of Quarantine. On December 18, 1984, the Cashier’s Office was allegedly robbed, resulting in the loss of P12,500.00 from a steel cabinet used to store cash. The police investigation found that suspects likely entered through a window and opened the cabinet, possibly using its original key, which was left inside a small wooden box nearby. A subsequent cash count by the resident auditor revealed a shortage and noted that petitioner failed to use the office safe for deposits, instead utilizing the steel cabinet, and that subsidiary ledgers were not properly maintained.
Petitioner requested relief from accountability from the Commission on Audit (COA). The COA denied her request, finding her negligent under Section 105(2) of P.D. 1445 for not using the available safe, leaving the cabinet key accessible, and allowing other persons access to the cash. Her motion for reconsideration was also denied.
ISSUE
Whether the Commission on Audit acted with grave abuse of discretion in denying petitioner’s request for relief from accountability for the lost cash.
RULING
The Supreme Court ruled that the COA did not commit grave abuse of discretion. The legal standard for negligence is the omission of what a reasonable and prudent person would do under the same circumstances. Applying this test, petitioner failed to exercise the diligence required of her position as an accountable officer.
The Court found petitioner negligent for several reasons. First, she did not use the office safe. While she claimed the safe’s combination was not entrusted to her, she failed to request an immediate change of its combination, which would have been a prudent step. Her reliance on the past practice of using the steel cabinet did not excuse her from exercising independent judgment for the safekeeping of funds. Second, leaving the original key to the steel cabinet in an accessible wooden box nearby created an obvious security risk, as confirmed by the police report. Third, the factual findings of the COA, supported by the audit report and police investigation, are accorded respect and are binding when supported by substantial evidence, as in this case. Therefore, her liability for the loss, attributable to her negligence, was properly upheld. The petition was dismissed for lack of merit.