Cited Laws
TL;DR — Ruling
WHEREFORE, the 28 November 2002 Decision prepared by the former Administrative Adjudication Bureau (AAB), this Office, recommending the dismissal (without prejudice to its re-filing) of the administrative complaint against [Bungubung] is hereby DISAPPROVED. Respondent LEOPOLDO F. BUNGUBUNG, Port District Manager, Manila Port District, Philippine Ports Authority, is hereby found liable for Grave Misconduct and, as such, is DISMISSED from the service.
WHEREFORE, the 28 November 2002 Decision prepared by the former Administrative Adjudication Bureau (AAB), this Office, recommending the dismissal (without prejudice to its re-filing) of the administrative complaint against [Bungubung] is hereby DISAPPROVED. Respondent LEOPOLDO F. BUNGUBUNG, Port District Manager, Manila Port District, Philippine Ports Authority, is hereby found liable for Grave Misconduct and, as such, is DISMISSED from the service. The penalty of dismissal shall carry with it the accessory penalties of cancellation of eligibility, forfeiture of retirement benefits, and [Bungubung's] perpetual disqualification from reemployment in the government service. In the interim, the Ombudsman issued an Order [9] dated 10 September 2003 in OMB-0-01-0793, for the filing of the criminal complaint against Bungubung, after finding that there was probable cause to indict him for violation of Section 3(b) of the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act. [10] The Ombudsman took into consideration its aforementioned 10 September 2003 Order in OMB-0-01-0793, when it found in OMB-ADM-0-01-0502 that Bungubung took advantage of his position as Chairman of the PDSBAC of the PPA, using it as leverage in soliciting cash and a Mitsubishi Pajero van from the bidders as consideration for the award of the security contract. According to the Ombudsman, such actuations constitute conduct grossly prejudicial to the best interest of the service. It rejected Bungubung's denial and instead gave credence to the attestation of Cruz that she personally delivered the P50,000.00 to Bungubung. Bungubung filed a Motion for Reconsideration [11] of the 11 January 2005 Order of the Ombudsman in OMB-ADM-0-01-0502, but it was denied by the Ombudsman in another Order [12] dated 28 April 2005, to wit: WHEREFORE, the Motion for Reconsideration dated 21 January 2005 filed by respondent Leopoldo F. Bungubung is DENIED. The Order dated 11 January 2005 finding him liable for Grave Misconduct thereby ordering him dismissed from the service, together with its accessory penalties, is hereby AFFIRMED. Bungubung then sought recourse to the Court of Appeals via a Petition for Review under Rule 43 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure, docketed as CA-G.R. SP No. 89689. He asserted therein that the Ombudsman erred in (a) holding that there was substantial evidence to make him liable for grave misconduct, resulting in his dismissal from service and imposition upon him of the accessory penalties; and (b) ordering him dismissed from the service, when the Constitution merely empowered said office to make a recommendation of dismissal. Pending resolution of CA-G.R. SP No. 89689 by the Court of Appeals, Bungubung filed therein a Motion for Issuance of a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) and/or Writ of Preliminary Injunction to enjoin the Ombudsman and the PPA General Manager from implementing the Order dated 11 January 2005 which dismissed him from service. [13] The Court of Appeals granted the TRO on
G.R. No. 172635 - OFFICE OF THE OMBUDSMAN, VS. PEDRO DELIJERO, JR..D E C I S I O N - Supreme Court E-Library
G.R. No. 172635 -
CaseG.R. No. 174045 - OFFICE OF THE OMBUDSMAN, vs. LALINETH LISONDRA, TERESITA SERGIO, and THE HONORABLE COURT OF APPEALS (FORMER TWENTY-FIRST DIVISION), Cagayan de Oro City.D E C I S I O N - Supreme Court E-Library
G.R. No. 174045 -
CaseG.R. No. 238563 - MANSUE NERY LUKBAN, VS. OMBUDSMAN CONCHITA CARPIOMORALES.DECISION - Supreme Court E-Library
G.R. No. 238563 -