Cited Laws
TL;DR — Ruling
Wherefore, respondent Engr. Carlito Salomon is hereby required to submit to the Board of Discipline, within seventy two (72) hours from receipt hereof his Answer, under oath (in seven (7) copies), to the charges and to present whatever evidence in support of his defense. Respondent is hereby advised of his right to counsel and to indicate in his answer whether or not a formal investigation of the charge/s is requested.
Wherefore, respondent Engr. Carlito Salomon is hereby required to submit to the Board of Discipline, within seventy two (72) hours from receipt hereof his Answer, under oath (in seven (7) copies), to the charges and to present whatever evidence in support of his defense. Respondent is hereby advised of his right to counsel and to indicate in his answer whether or not a formal investigation of the charge/s is requested. [23] On January 16, 2012, Salomon was placed under a 60-day preventive suspension. Two days later, the Board heard his case and Salomon questioned the Board's jurisdiction over his case's subject matter. [24] A few days later, or on January 24, 2012, Salomon filed an Omnibus Motion to Dismiss. Afterward, he filed a Motion to Drop Case with Motion to Withdraw Omnibus Motion to Dismiss, to which the prosecutor filed a comment. [25] In its February 14, 2012 Order, the Board resolved both motions by upholding its jurisdiction over Salomon's case. It further declared that his motion was "deemed to be his Answer" since he did not file his Answer. The Board then set the case for a February 22, 2012 preliminary conference. [26] Salomon and the prosecutor filed their respective Position Papers. [27] Salomon also filed a Reply to the prosecutor's Position Paper. [28] Salomon alleged that: (1) there was a failure to comply with the procedural requirements in the conduct of the random drug testing and the investigation on his administrative case; (2) the complaint against him was invalid; [29] and (3) the Board had no jurisdiction over his case. [30] In a March 30, 2012 Decision (Recommendation to the Local Chief Executive), the Board recommended Salomon's termination from service: Therefore, this BOARD recommends to the Honorable Aldrin L. San Pedro, being the disciplining authority, to terminate the services of respondent from government service for the reason that his being found to be positively tested for methamphetamine is considered under the URACCS (now RRACCS) as a grave misconduct which penalty is outright dismissal from service. SO ORDERED.