G.R. No. 191616 - FRANCIS C. CERVANTES, VS. CITY SERVICE CORPORATION AND VALENTIN PRIETO, JR..D E C I S I O N - Supreme Court E-Library

Ruling

Accordingly, the 60-day period for filing the petition for certiorari with the CA should be counted from the receipt by the petitioner's counsel of a copy of the NLRC Decision dated July 22, 2009 on November 19, 2009. It should be stressed that the NLRC sent the notice of Resolution to petitioner's counsel only on November 19, 2009. While there was a notice of Resolution dated July 22, 2009, said notice was not served upon petitioner's counsel. Thus, strictly speaking, the running of the 60-day period to appeal should be counted from November 19, 2009 when the notice of Resolution dated July 22, 2009 was served on petitioner's counsel. Considering that petitioner filed his petition for certiorari on October 7, 2009, the same was well within the prescribed period to appeal. The petition for certiorari was filed on time. However, the foregoing discussion notwithstanding, we have reviewed the records of the case at bar and find no reversible error committed by the NLRC concerning the merits of the present petition. While the petition for certiorari was timely filed with the CA, the instant petition would still suffer the same verdict of dismissal in view of the identical findings of the Labor Arbiter and the NLRC. The findings of fact made by Labor Arbiters and affirmed by the NLRC are not only entitled to great respect, but even finality, and are considered binding if the same are supported by substantial evidence. We find that the NLRC correctly upheld petitioner's dismissal to be valid. Records show that petitioner was relieved from his post in UST due to his poor work performance and attitude. However, while petitioner was removed from UST, private respondent immediately reassigned him to Mercury Drug Fairview which he refused to accept. Despite notices requiring him to report back to work, petitioner refused to heed. Considering that it was petitioner who went on absence without official leave (AWOL), the same negates the allegation of illegal dismissal. WHEREFORE , premises considered, the petition is DENIED . The NLRC Resolutions dated February 9, 2009 and July 22, 2009 are AFFIRMED . SO ORDERED.