G.R. No. 193143, December 01, 2020. EMERITA A. COLLADO, SUPPLY OFFICER III, PHILIPPINE SCIENCE HIGH SCHOOL, DILIMAN CAMPUS, QUEZON CITY, PETITIONER, VS. HON. REYNALDO A. VILLAR, HON. JUANITO G. ESPINO, JR. [COMMISSIONERS, COMMISSION ON AUDIT] AND THE DIRECTOR, LEGAL SERVICES SECTOR, ADJUDICATION AND LEGAL SERVICES OFFICE, COMMISSION ON AUDIT, RESPONDENTS.
FACTS

Petitioner Emerita A. Collado, a Supply Officer III of the Philippine Science High School (PSHS), was held solidarily liable by the Commission on Audit (COA) for a disallowance amounting to P2,148,019.86. This sum represented an overpayment to the contractor, N.C. Roxas, Inc., due to an erroneous computation of liquidated damages for the delayed construction of the PSHS-Mindanao Campus. The COA found that PSHS management deducted only P252,114.79 from the contractor’s progress billings, whereas the correct formula under the Implementing Rules of P.D. 1594 mandated a deduction of P2,400,134.65. The Notices of Disallowance were affirmed by the COA Commission Proper in 2002 and 2008. Collado subsequently filed a letter with the COA’s Legal Services Sector, which was treated as a second motion for reconsideration and was denied with finality through a Letter dated July 16, 2010, for being a prohibited pleading under the COA’s procedural rules.

ISSUE

Whether the COA committed grave abuse of discretion in affirming the Notices of Disallowance and in holding Collado solidarily liable for the overpayment.

RULING

The Supreme Court dismissed the petition and affirmed the COA’s rulings. The Court found no grave abuse of discretion in the COA’s factual determination that there was a clear under-deduction of liquidated damages, resulting in an overpayment. The computation was strictly based on the formula prescribed by law, and the COA’s findings on such technical matters are accorded finality if supported by substantial evidence. On the issue of liability, the Court upheld Collado’s solidary liability. As a supply officer involved in the procurement process, she was a member of the Bids and Awards Committee and was responsible for ensuring that payments complied with contract stipulations and applicable laws. Her failure to verify and apply the correct formula for liquidated damages constituted gross negligence in the performance of her duties, making her liable for the resulting pecuniary loss to the government. The Court also sustained the COA’s denial of her second motion for reconsideration as a prohibited pleading, which is a valid exercise of its rule-making power to ensure the orderly administration of justice and the finality of its decisions.