G.R. No. A.M. No. 11238-Ret. August 18, 2015
In Re: Expiration of Fixed Term of Office of Atty. Saaduddin A. Alauya, Office of the Jurisconsult, Zamboanga City

FACTS

Atty. Saaduddin A. Alauya was appointed as Jurisconsult in Islamic Law for a fixed term of seven years from August 12, 1996, to August 20, 2003. Prior to this, he had rendered over 33 years of government service, including as a Municipal Trial Court judge, professor, vice-governor, and chairman of a commission. Upon the expiration of his term at age 65, he applied for retirement under Republic Act No. 910 (RA 910), as amended. Initially, the Office of the Court Administrator (OCA) recommended denial, arguing RA 910 applied only to justices or judges. However, the Court en banc, via Resolutions dated February 3, 2004, and March 2, 2004, conferred upon him the rank and privileges of a Regional Trial Court (RTC) judge effective October 1996 and allowed him to retire under RA 910. He received a lump-sum retirement benefit. In 2008, he requested payment of a lifetime monthly pension under Section 3 of RA 910, which accrues five years after retirement. This request was denied by the Court in a December 16, 2008 Resolution, citing its earlier ruling in A.M. No. 11838-Ret. (Re: Ponferrada). Atty. Alauya sought reconsideration repeatedly. The OCA initially recommended denial but later reversed its stance and recommended approval of his pension request, noting that other Court officials with judicial ranks had retired under RA 910 and were receiving lifetime monthly pensions.

ISSUE

Whether Atty. Saaduddin A. Alauya, having been allowed to retire under RA 910 and conferred the rank and privileges of an RTC judge, is entitled to a lifetime monthly pension pursuant to Section 3 of RA 910.

RULING

Yes. The Court granted Atty. Alauya’s request for a lifetime monthly pension. The Court held that the term “privileges of a judge of the RTC,” as conferred upon him by the Court’s March 2, 2004 Resolution, includes the retirement benefits under RA 910, specifically the lifetime monthly pension provided in Section 3. The Court emphasized that retirement laws like RA 910 are to be liberally construed in favor of the retiree to achieve their humanitarian purpose of providing sustenance. Since Atty. Alauya was qualified and allowed to retire under Section 1 of RA 910, and the only requirement to be entitled to the Section 3 monthly pension is to have retired under Section 1, he is entitled to the benefit. The Court noted that other Court officials (e.g., deputy court administrators, clerks of court) who were given judicial ranks and privileges, though not justices or judges, have been allowed to retire under RA 910 and receive the lifetime pension. Denying him a similar benefit would be unjust and discriminatory. The Court also agreed with the OCA that its earlier Ponferrada ruling, which dealt with a different issue of automatic adjustment of benefits, should not have been applied to deny Atty. Alauya’s pension claim.