Back to Search
JurisprudenceG.R. NO. 172174 -

G.R. NO. 172174 - DAVAO CONTRACTORS DEVELOPMENT COOPERATIVE (DACODECO), REPRESENTED BY CHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD ENGR. EDGAR L. CHAVEZ, VS. MARILYN A. PASAWA. D E C I S I O N - Supreme Court E-Library

Cited Laws

RA 230,RA 387,RA 399,RA 313,RA 685,RA 618,RA 312,RA 671,RA 137,RA 147,RA 277,RA 286,
Share:

TL;DR — Ruling

WHEREFORE, premises considered , judgment is hereby rendered declaring Complainant's dismissal as illegal. Accordingly, the Respondent DAVAO CONTRACTORS DEVELOPMENT COOPERATIVE (DACODECO) acting through its responsible officers is hereby ordered to pay the complainant the sum of SIXTY EIGHT THOUSAND TWO HUNDRED FIFTY PESOS (P68,250.

Decision

Ruling

WHEREFORE, premises considered , judgment is hereby rendered declaring Complainant's dismissal as illegal. Accordingly, the Respondent DAVAO CONTRACTORS DEVELOPMENT COOPERATIVE (DACODECO) acting through its responsible officers is hereby ordered to pay the complainant the sum of SIXTY EIGHT THOUSAND TWO HUNDRED FIFTY PESOS (P68,250.00) , representing her separation pay of one month salary and backwages tentatively computed to cover the period from June 1, 2004 up to the date of promulgation of this decision. SO ORDERED . [8] Dissatisfied, DACODECO appealed to the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC). In a Resolution [9] dated July 22, 2005, the NLRC dismissed the appeal for failure to accompany the memorandum of appeal with a certificate of non-forum shopping. Thus: WHEREFORE , the appeal is hereby DISMISSED for NON-PERFECTION . Accordingly, the decision appealed from is now rendered final and executory. SO ORDERED . [10] DACODECO elevated the dismissal of its appeal to the Court of Appeals by way of petition for certiorari. But the appellate court dismissed it on technical grounds: Instant petition is hereby DISMISSED on the following grounds: 1) the verification and affidavit of non-forum shopping was signed by EDGAR L. CHAVEZ who does not appear to be a party to the case nor duly authorized to institute present petition in this Court, as the copy of the board resolution attached to the petition authorized Mr. CHAVEZ to represent petitioner Cooperative only before the NLRC; moreover, the copy of the board resolution was not certified nor authenticated by the Board Secretary; and 2) failure to indicate the following material dates pursuant to Section 3, Rule 46 of the Rules of Court: a) date of receipt of the assailed 22 July 2005 resolution; and b) date of filing of the motion for reconsideration. SO ORDERED.