GR 193983; (March, 2012) (Digest)
G.R. No. 193983 ; March 14, 2012
VICTORY M. FERNANDEZ, Petitioner, vs. OFFICE OF THE OMBUDSMAN, FORMER GOVERNOR OF THE PROVINCE OF AKLAN FLORENCIO T. MIRAFLORES, INCUMBENT GOVERNOR CARLITO MARQUEZ, and SECRETARY OF THE DEPARTMENT OF INTERIOR AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT RONALDO V. PUNO, Respondents.
FACTS
Petitioner Victory M. Fernandez was the Provincial Engineer of Aklan. In 1994, the province contracted Jireh Construction for the Alibagon-Baybay Bridge (Phase II). Despite a 30-day extension granted upon Fernandez’s endorsement, the project was severely delayed and later abandoned. In early 1995, while the first bridge project was ongoing, the Pre-Qualification Bids and Awards Committee (PBAC), of which Fernandez was a member, awarded four additional infrastructure projects to the same Jireh Construction. A subsequent Commission on Audit (COA) report in November 1995 revealed that all five projects awarded to Jireh Construction were incomplete and abandoned, with the government having paid substantial sums. The COA found that the PBAC awarded the new contracts despite Jireh’s poor performance and abandonment of the first project.
The Ombudsman found Fernandez administratively liable for Gross Neglect of Duty and Grave Misconduct, meting the penalty of dismissal. The Court of Appeals affirmed this decision. Fernandez filed this petition, arguing he merely endorsed a time extension for the first project and that the PBAC’s collective decision to award the four subsequent projects was made in good faith based on Jireh’s qualification documents.
ISSUE
Whether the Ombudsman and the Court of Appeals committed grave abuse of discretion in finding petitioner Victory M. Fernandez administratively liable for Gross Neglect of Duty and Grave Misconduct.
RULING
The Supreme Court denied the petition and affirmed the assailed rulings. The Court held that the findings of the Ombudsman, affirmed by the CA, were supported by substantial evidence. As Provincial Engineer and a PBAC member, Fernandez had direct knowledge and supervision over the ongoing bridge project. His endorsement of the time extension and his participation in the PBAC that awarded four new projects to the same contractor, despite its clear abandonment and unsatisfactory performance on the prior project, constituted gross negligence. This negligence resulted in undue injury to the government through wasted public funds.
The Court emphasized that administrative liability attaches for gross neglect of duty, defined as the flagrant and culpable refusal or unwillingness to perform a duty. Fernandez’s failure to exercise due diligence and his participation in awarding further contracts to a non-performing contractor demonstrated a disregard for his duties to safeguard government interest. The penalty of dismissal was thus appropriate. The Court found no grave abuse of discretion, as the administrative findings were based on the evidence on record.