G.R. No. 100671 . April 7, 1993.
TEODORICO E. MENDIOLA, petitioner, vs. CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION and ECONOMIC INTELLIGENCE AND INVESTIGATION BUREAU, respondents.

FACTS

Petitioner Teodorico E. Mendiola had been an employee of the Economic Intelligence and Investigation Bureau (EIIB) since 1973, holding the position of Budget Examiner III until April 30, 1988. Pursuant to Executive Order No. 127 mandating the reorganization of the Department of Finance, the EIIB Commissioner issued a memorandum dated January 19, 1988, providing categories for the separation of personnel. On March 30, 1988, petitioner received a notice of termination effective April 30, 1988. He appealed to the Civil Service Commission (CSC), alleging denial of due process and contesting his inclusion in Category I (personnel with administrative, criminal, and/or patently undesirable personnel) as he had received commendations and satisfactory performance ratings. On September 21, 1988, the CSC ruled in petitioner’s favor, declaring his separation illegal for non-compliance with prescribed reorganization guidelines (CSC Memorandum Circular No. 5, s. 1988) and ordering his reinstatement with back salaries. Petitioner filed a motion for execution on December 13, 1988. Subsequently, petitioner discovered that the EIIB had filed a motion for reconsideration of the September 21, 1988 resolution on October 27, 1988. The CSC granted this motion and set aside its earlier resolution in a February 1, 1989 resolution. Petitioner filed an Omnibus Motion on July 30, 1990, praying to strike off the EIIB’s motion for reconsideration and to set aside the February 1, 1989 resolution. The CSC denied this Omnibus Motion in its June 6, 1991 resolution. Petitioner then filed this Petition for Certiorari and Mandamus seeking annulment of the CSC’s February 1, 1989 and June 6, 1991 resolutions and an order for his immediate reinstatement.

ISSUE

1. Whether the Civil Service Commission’s September 21, 1988 resolution had become final and executory, thereby depriving the CSC of jurisdiction to entertain the EIIB’s motion for reconsideration and to reverse said resolution.
2. Whether petitioner was denied due process when the CSC heard the EIIB’s motion for reconsideration without notice to him.

RULING

1. YES. The Supreme Court ruled that the CSC’s September 21, 1988 resolution had become final and executory. The applicable reglementary period for filing a motion for reconsideration was fifteen (15) days from receipt of the decision, as provided under CSC Resolution No. 88-135, which specially governs appeals to the Commission of cases arising from reorganization. The EIIB received the resolution on October 6, 1988, and filed its motion for reconsideration on October 27, 1988, which was beyond the 15-day period. Consequently, the September 21, 1988 resolution became final and executory after October 21, 1988. The doctrine of finality of judgment applies to quasi-judicial agencies like the CSC. Once a decision becomes final and executory, the issuing body loses jurisdiction to alter or amend it, except for execution. Therefore, the CSC had no power to entertain the motion for reconsideration or to reverse its final resolution. The February 1, 1989 and June 6, 1991 resolutions were declared null and void.
2. NO. The Supreme Court ruled that any defect due to lack of notice to petitioner regarding the hearing of the EIIB’s motion for reconsideration was cured when petitioner filed his Omnibus Motion on July 30, 1990, thereby being given the chance to be heard. Denial of due process cannot be invoked where a party was given the opportunity to be heard on a motion for reconsideration.
The Supreme Court GRANTED the petition. It declared the CSC resolutions dated February 1, 1989 and June 6, 1991 null and void. The Court ordered respondents CSC and EIIB to reinstate petitioner Teodorico E. Mendiola to his former position or to an equivalent position without loss of seniority rights and privileges. The prevailing party is entitled to a writ of execution as a matter of right upon finality of judgment.