GR 148247; (August, 2006) (Digest)
G.R. No. 148247. August 7, 2006. AIR PHILIPPINES CORPORATION, Petitioner, vs. ENRICO E. ZAMORA, Respondent.
FACTS
Respondent Enrico Zamora, employed by petitioner Air Philippines Corporation (APC) as a B-737 Flight Deck Crew, applied for promotion to captain. After completing training, APC did not promote him. Zamora filed a complaint for constructive dismissal. The Labor Arbiter ruled in his favor, ordering reinstatement with backwages and damages. APC appealed to the NLRC, which initially reversed the decision but, upon Zamora’s motion for reconsideration, modified it by ordering APC to pay Zamora unpaid salaries and allowances amounting to P198,502.30, citing the executory nature of reinstatement pending appeal under Article 223 of the Labor Code.
APC filed a Petition for Certiorari with the Court of Appeals (CA) to annul the NLRC Resolutions, alleging grave abuse of discretion. APC attached certified true copies of the NLRC Resolutions and the Labor Arbiter’s Decision, along with photocopies of related orders on execution. The CA dismissed the petition outright for APC’s failure to attach copies of all pleadings and other material portions of the record. APC filed a motion for reconsideration, subsequently submitting the required documents. The CA denied the motion, prompting APC to elevate the case to the Supreme Court via a Petition for Review on Certiorari.
ISSUE
Whether the Court of Appeals committed reversible error in dismissing the Petition for Certiorari for failure to attach all pleadings and material portions of the record.
RULING
Yes. The Supreme Court reversed the CA Resolutions. The Court clarified the procedural requirement under Rule 65, Section 1, in relation to Rule 46, Section 3. Only pleadings and documents that are material and pertinent to establishing a prima facie case of grave abuse of discretion need to be attached to a petition for certiorari. The purpose is to enable the court to determine whether the lower tribunal acted capriciously. Non-material documents need not be attached, and their omission is not a ground for dismissal.
In this case, APC had attached the essential documents—the assailed NLRC Resolutions and the Labor Arbiter’s Decision—which were sufficient for the CA to preliminarily assess the alleged abuse of discretion. The other pleadings (e.g., complaint, answer, position papers) were not indispensable for this initial determination. Moreover, APC rectified any perceived deficiency by submitting the documents with its motion for reconsideration. The CA’s insistence on their initial inclusion and its denial of the motion constituted a rigid and erroneous application of procedural rules, warranting reversal. Consequently, the Supreme Court annulled the CA Resolutions but ultimately dismissed APC’s Petition for Certiorari on substantive grounds, affirming the NLRC’s award of unpaid salaries based on the executory reinstatement order.