G.R. No. L-6511 February 25, 1954
ASSOCIATION OF DRUGSTORE EMPLOYEES, petitioner, vs. ARSENIO C. ROLDAN, ET AL., respondents.

FACTS

On March 4, 1952, the Court of Industrial Relations (CIR) ordered Farmacia Oro to reinstate five employees (Leonila Calcas, Marina C. Villaroman, Salud Aranza, Vicente Sayago, and Quirico Saratan) to their former positions with back pay from their dismissal date. This decision became final. The Association of Drugstore Employees, representing the employees, filed motions for execution. A writ of execution was issued on July 31, 1952. Pursuant to this writ, the sheriff garnished P5,295.24 from Farmacia Oro’s bank account, representing back wages from October 31, 1951 (dismissal date) to July 31, 1952. Farmacia Oro later filed a motion to suspend payment, alleging (1) the employees had other employment during the case pendency, and their wages therefrom should be deducted, and (2) on June 12, 1952, the employees’ counsel was asked to have them report for duty, and their failure to do so meant Farmacia Oro was not bound to pay back wages from that date. The CIR, through an order dated October 21, 1952, and a subsequent resolution en banc dated January 6, 1953, held the employees were entitled to back wages only from October 23, 1951, until June 12, 1952. The Association filed this petition for review.

ISSUE

Whether the Court of Industrial Relations acted correctly in modifying its final and executory decision of March 4, 1952, by limiting the award of back wages to the period ending June 12, 1952, based on Farmacia Oro’s alleged notice to the employees to report for duty.

RULING

No. The Supreme Court set aside the CIR’s order of October 21, 1952, and resolution of January 6, 1953. The Court directed the CIR to enforce its original decision of March 4, 1952. The Court found that at the time of the alleged notice on June 12, 1952, the March 4 decision was not yet final and executory, as Farmacia Oro’s petition for certiorari (G.R. No. L-5744) with the Supreme Court had not been finally disposed of until July 7, 1952. Furthermore, Farmacia Oro’s failure to oppose the motions for execution and its act of placing the employees in lower positions when they were brought by the sheriff on August 14, 1952, contradicted its claim of an intent to reinstate as of June 12. The notice, even if given, was not decisive as the employees lived in different and distant places, making immediate compliance impractical. The CIR’s suspension and reduction of the back pay constituted a departure from the terms of its final and executory decision.