G.R. No. 254697 - TRAVELOKA PHILIPPINES, INC. AND YADY GUITANA, VS. PONCEVIC CAPINO CEBALLOS, JR..R E S O L U T I O N - Supreme Court E-Library

Ruling

Accordingly, aside from the lack of substantial evidence to justify respondent's termination on the alleged grounds of serious misconduct and loss of trust and confidence, as well as the labor tribunals' wanton disregard of the circumstances leading to his constructive dismissal, this due process violation equally taints the NLRC's ruling with grave abuse of discretion. As such, the CA correctly granted respondent's certiorari petition filed before it. Nevertheless, the Court is constrained to modify the CA ruling with respect to the order of reinstatement. According to jurisprudence, reinstatement means restoration to a state or condition from which one had been removed or separated. The person reinstated assumes the position he had occupied prior to his dismissal. Reinstatement presupposes that the previous position from which one had been removed still exists, or that there is an unfilled position which is substantially equivalent or of similar nature as the one previously occupied by the employee. [50] "In the event that reinstatement is no longer possible, separation pay is awarded to the employee ." [51] Here, it is undisputed that respondent's position as country manager was already filled up with the hiring of Yonathan. [52] Since respondent's reinstatement is no longer viable, then the payment of separation pay in lieu of reinstatement is warranted. WHEREFORE , the petition is DENIED . The Decision dated June 29, 2020 and the Resolution dated November 25, 2020 of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. SP No. 162588 are hereby AFFIRMED with MODIFICATION in that in lieu of reinstatement, petitioner Traveloka Philippines, Inc. is ordered to pay respondent Poncevic Capino Ceballos, Jr. separation pay equivalent to one (1) month salary for every year of service, with a fraction of at least six (6) months to be considered as one (1) whole year, to be computed from the date of his employment up to finality of this Resolution. The rest of the Court of Appeals' Decision STANDS . SO ORDERED.