GR 149539; (January, 2005) (Digest)
G.R. No. 149539 ; January 19, 2005
NESTOR M. CAYAGO and VIRGILIO M. FERRER, petitioners, vs. HON. JOEY LINA, SECRETARY OF THE DEPARTMENT OF INTERIOR AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT, and CHAIRMAN, NATIONAL POLICE COMMISSION; and CHIEF, PHILIPPINE NATIONAL POLICE, respondents.
FACTS
Petitioners, police officers, were administratively dismissed from the service in 1995 for grave misconduct related to kidnapping charges. They appealed to the National Appellate Board (NAB) of the NAPOLCOM, which affirmed their dismissal in a July 17, 1996 Decision. Petitioners did not file a motion for reconsideration of this NAB Decision. Subsequently, in February 1997, the Regional Trial Court dismissed the related criminal case against them for insufficiency of evidence. Relying on this acquittal, the PNP Chief later granted their pending motion for reconsideration of the administrative case, modified the penalty to suspension, and reinstated them.
However, the NAPOLCOM Commissioner nullified the PNP Chief’s order, ruling that the NAB Decision of July 17, 1996 had already become final and executory, stripping the PNP Chief of jurisdiction. Petitioners then appealed to the Civil Service Commission and the Department of the Interior and Local Government, but both upheld their dismissal, citing the finality of the NAB Decision. The Court of Appeals affirmed these rulings.
ISSUE
The core issue is whether the NAB Decision dated July 17, 1996 had attained finality, thereby rendering the subsequent order of the PNP Chief reinstating the petitioners null and void for lack of jurisdiction.
RULING
The Supreme Court denied the petition and affirmed the petitioners’ dismissal. The legal logic hinges on the doctrine of finality of judgments and the specific appellate procedure under Republic Act No. 6975 (The DILG Act of 1990). The Court ruled that the NAB Decision of July 17, 1996 became final and executory after the petitioners failed to file a motion for reconsideration within the reglementary period. Under Section 45 of R.A. No. 6975 , a decision of the NAB is appealable only to the Secretary of the DILG. By not filing a motion for reconsideration with the NAB or a timely appeal to the DILG Secretary, the petitioners allowed the NAB Decision to become immutable.
Consequently, the PNP Chief’s August 1997 order, which attempted to modify the penalty, was issued without jurisdiction. A final judgment can no longer be altered, and any act performed in violation of this principle is void. The Court also found no denial of due process, as petitioners were afforded ample opportunity to be heard throughout the administrative proceedings. Their subsequent acquittal in the criminal case did not automatically absolve them administratively, as the standards of proof differ—substantial evidence suffices in administrative cases. Thus, the final and executory NAB Decision validly terminated their employment.