G.R. No. 140563 - DANTE M. POLLOSO, VS. HON. CELSO D. GANGAN, CHAIRMAN, COMMISSION ON AUDIT, HON. RAUL C. FLORES, COMMISSIONER, COMMISSION ON AUDIT, HON. EMMANUEL M. DALMAN, COMMISSIONER, COMMISSION ON AUDIT..D E C I S I O N - Supreme Court E-Library

Ruling

Accordingly, the following were held to be personally liable for the amounts due to Atty. Satorre: Dr. Francisco Viray, NPC contracting party; Manolo C. Marquez, for certifying the claim as necessary, lawful and authorized; Andrea B. Roa and Romeo Gallego, for verifying the supporting documents to be complete and proper; Jesus Aliño, for reviewing the supporting documents to be complete and proper; Dante M. Polloso, Project Manager II, Leyte-Cebu Interconnection Project (LCIP), National Power Corporation-Visayas Regional Center, for approving the claim; and Benemerito Satorre, as the payee. [4] On 27 January 1995, only petitioner Dante Polloso submitted a letter-explanation refuting the alleged violation contained in the Notice of Disallowance and sought reconsideration thereof. [5] This was denied by the Unit Auditor in a resolution, dated 30 March 1995. [6] On 10 October 1995, petitioner appealed the denial of the Unit Auditor to the Regional Director, COA Regional Office No. VII; [7] the latter denied the same. [8] On 29 June 1998, a petition for review was filed before the Commission Proper, Commission on Audit, Central Office. [9] On 29 October 1999, the COA issued the decision assailed before this Court. The dispositive portion thereof, reads: Thus, it is crystal clear from the aforequoted provision of law and regulations that the service contract entered into by and between the National Power Corporation and Atty. Satorre is in contravention thereof. Upon the foregoing considerations, the instant appeal of MR. DANTE M. POLLOSO, has to be, as it is hereby denied. Accordingly, the disallowance of P283,763.39 is hereby affirmed. [10] Hence, this appeal, petitioner raising the following issues: I DOES THE PROHIBITION UNDER COA CIRCULAR NO. 86-255 DATED APRIL 2, 1986 AND SEC. 212 OF THE GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTING AND AUDITING MANUAL IMPOSED ON GOVERNMENT AGENCIES FROM HIRING PRIVATE LAWYERS "TO HANDLE THEIR LEGAL CASES" APPLY TO A LAWYER HIRED BY VIRTUE OF A SERVICE CONTRACT BUT WHO ACTUALLY HANDLE PURELY RIGHT-OF-WAY MATTERS (EXCLUDING HANDLING OF COURT CASES)? II WILL COA CIRCULAR NO. 86-255 DATED APRIL 2, 1986 AND SEC. 212, VOLUME I OF THE GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTING AND AUDITING MANUAL OPERATE TO RESTRICT THE PRACTICE OF THE LAW PROFESSION AND THEREFORE REPUGNANT TO SEC. 5, ARTICLE VII OF THE 1987 PHILIPPINE CONSTITUTION? III DOES SECTION 38, CHAPTER 9, BOOK I OF EXECUTIVE ORDER NO. 292, OTHERWISE KNOWN AS THE ADMINISTRATIVE CODE OF 1987 APPLY TO PETITIONER FOR HAVING ACTED IN GOOD FAITH AND WITHOUT MALICE AND MERELY IMPLEMENTED A VALID CONTRACT ENTERED INTO BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE NATIONAL POWER CORPORATION? IV DOES THE PRINCIPLE OF "QUANTUM MERUIT" APPLY TO THE SERVICES RENDERED BY ATTY. SATORRE WHICH BENEFITTED THE NATIONAL POWER CORPORATION? [11] The petition is without merit. In the main, petitioner posits that the phrase "handling of legal cases" should be construed to mean as conduct of cases or handling of court cases or litigation and not to