G.R. No. L-47196 July 14, 1978
ANTONIA C. CARTAS, petitioner, vs. REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES (Bureau of Public Schools), THE HONORABLE SECRETARY OF LABOR & COMPENSATION APPEALS & REVIEW STAFF, respondents.

FACTS

Petitioner Antonia C. Cartas, a public school teacher, retired from the Bureau of Public Schools on January 7, 1973. On April 4, 1974, she filed a claim for disability compensation under the Workmen’s Compensation Act for ailments including PTB and duodenal ulcer. The Hearing Officer dismissed her claim, reasoning that her employer-employee relationship had terminated upon retirement and that her ailments were not disabling or service-connected. On appeal, the Secretary of Labor reversed this dismissal. The Secretary found the ailments work-connected and awarded compensation for a period of total temporary disability from December 14, 1968, to February 5, 1969, amounting to P710.99, based on the employer’s own report and her physician’s opinion.
Dissatisfied, Cartas petitioned the Supreme Court for review. She argued the Secretary of Labor erred by not finding her totally and permanently disabled, entitling her to the maximum P6,000 benefit under Section 14 of the Act. Alternatively, she claimed entitlement to non-scheduled disability benefits under Section 18. The respondents, through the Solicitor General, opposed the petition.

ISSUE

The issues are: (1) Whether petitioner was totally and permanently disabled to warrant the maximum disability benefit under Section 14; and (2) If not, whether she is entitled to non-scheduled disability benefits under Section 18 of Act No. 3428, as amended.

RULING

The Supreme Court denied the petition for lack of merit. On the first issue, the Court held petitioner was not totally and permanently disabled. The evidence, including the Physician’s Reports from Dr. Faustino Nufable and Dr. Juan Komiya, explicitly stated her illnesses did not render her totally and permanently disabled for labor. Dr. Komiya’s report indicated she could resume her former occupation. The awarded compensation correctly covered only a specific period of total temporary disability (December 14, 1968, to February 5, 1969). The Court reiterated the legal principle that compensation for loss of earning capacity cannot extend beyond an employee’s retirement date, as established in Hernandez vs. WCC. Any alleged disability after her retirement on January 7, 1973, was thus not compensable.
On the second issue, the Court ruled petitioner was not entitled to non-scheduled disability benefits under Section 18. The Court interpreted Section 18 as applying only to specific physical injuries resulting in amputation (e.g., of hands, feet, arms, or legs) or disfigurement of the face or head. The provision does not encompass disabling illnesses such as PTB and duodenal ulcer from which the petitioner suffered. Therefore, her claim did not fall within the ambit of non-scheduled disabilities contemplated by the law. The award made by the Secretary of Labor was deemed proper and final.