GR 124965; (October, 1998) (Digest)
G.R. No. 124965 , 124932, 124913 October 29, 1998
ROMEO C. NAMUHE, petitioner, vs. THE OMBUDSMAN and OMB TASK FORCE ON PUBLIC WORKS AND HIGHWAYS, respondents. / JIMMIE F. TEL-EQUEN, ROLANDO D. RAMIREZ and RUDY P. ANTONIO, petitioners, vs. Hon. FRANCISCO A. VILLA, Hon. GREGORIO VIGILAR and OMB TASK FORCE ON PUBLIC WORKS AND HIGHWAYS, respondents. / ROMULO H. MABUNGA, petitioner, vs. THE OMBUDSMAN and OMB TASK FORCE ON PUBLIC WORKS AND HIGHWAYS, respondents.
FACTS
Petitioners Jimmie F. Tel-Equen (District Engineer), Rolando D. Ramirez (Assistant District Engineer), and Rudy P. Antonio (Construction Section Chief) were employed at the Mountain Province Engineering District (MPED). Petitioners Romulo H. Mabunga (District Engineer) and Romeo C. Namuhe (Construction Section Chief) were employed at the Ifugao Engineering District (IED). They were administratively charged by the OMB Task Force on Public Works and Highways in OMB-0-91-0430 with dishonesty, falsification of official documents, grave misconduct, gross neglect of duty, violation of office rules and regulations, and conduct prejudicial to the best interest of the service in connection with a purported public bidding for Bailey bridge components for use in Mainit, Mountain Province. The Office of the Ombudsman, in a Resolution dated March 28, 1994, dismissed petitioners from government service for “acts of dishonesty, falsification of public documents, misconduct and conduct prejudicial to the best interest of the service.” Their Motions for Reconsideration were denied in an Order dated December 11, 1995. Petitioners directly filed Petitions for Review on Certiorari before the Supreme Court under Rule 45, which were consolidated.
ISSUE
The overriding issue is whether the Supreme Court has jurisdiction over appeals of administrative disciplinary decisions of the Office of the Ombudsman.
RULING
The Supreme Court ruled it has NO JURISDICTION over the petitions. Citing the case of Fabian v. Desierto, the Court declared Section 27 of Republic Act 6770 (the Ombudsman Act of 1989), which provided for appeals to the Supreme Court via Rule 45, as unconstitutional for violating Section 30, Article VI of the Constitution (which prohibits increasing the Supreme Court’s appellate jurisdiction without its advice and concurrence). The Court held that appeals from decisions of the Office of the Ombudsman in administrative disciplinary cases should be taken to the Court of Appeals under Rule 43 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure. The Office of the Ombudsman is considered a quasi-judicial agency falling under Rule 43. The transfer of the petitions to the Court of Appeals is procedural and does not impair any substantive right of the petitioners. Accordingly, the consolidated cases were REFERRED and TRANSFERRED to the Court of Appeals for final disposition, to be considered petitions for review under Rule 43.