G.R. No. 111211 - ABS-CBN EMPLOYEES UNION AND JOSE ENTRADICHO, VS. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION AND ABS-CBN BROADCASTING CORPORATION. D E C I S I O N - Supreme Court E-Library

Ruling

WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, judgment is hereby rendered as follows: 1. Declaring the dismissal of complaint JOSE ENTRADICHO by respondent firm as having been illegally effected; 2. Ordering respondent firm to immediately reinstate herein complainant to his former or substantially equivalent position without loss of seniority rights and benefits previously enjoyed; 3. Ordering respondent to pay complainant his full back wages from 04 August 1989 up to 31 August 1990 or a total of FORTY-SIX THOUSAND NINETY-TWO PESOS AND TWENTY-FOUR CENTAVOS (P46,092.24), or a period of 12.97 months times P3,556.50 per month; 4. Ordering respondent to pay complainant the amount of ONE THOUSAND SEVEN HUNDRED SEVENTY EIGHT PESOS AND TWENTY-FIVE CENTAVOS (P1,778.25), representing his fifteen (15) days suspension or the equivalent one-half month pay; 5. Ordering respondent to pay complainant for and as attorneys fees the amount of FOUR THOUSAND SEVEN HUNDRED EIGHTY SEVEN AND FOUR CENTAVOS (P4,787.04), representing ten (10) per cent of the total award in this case. Finally respondent firm is hereby ordered to show compliance of the immediate reinstatement of complainant ENTRADICHO, either physically or merely in the payroll at the option of the former within five (5) days from the receipt of this decision. On appeal, the NLRC set aside said decision and dismissed the case for lack of merit, but ABS-CBN was ordered to indemnify petitioner in the amount of P1,000.00 for its non-observance of due process in the termination of his services. Without filing any motion for reconsideration of the NLRCs decision, petitioner filed the instant special civil action. The petition must be dismissed. At the outset, the instant petition is procedurally defective for failure of petitioner to file a motion for reconsideration with the NLRC before availing of the special civil action of certiorari. In the case of Building Care Corporation v. NLRC, [4] the Court declared that this premature action constitutes a fatal infirmity thus: x x x The unquestioned rule in this jurisdiction is that certiorari will lie only if there is no appeal or any other plain, speedy and adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law against the acts of public respondent. In the instant case, the plain and adequate remedy expressly provided by the law was a motion for reconsideration of the assailed decision, based on palpable or patent errors, to be made under oath and filed within ten (10) days from receipt of the questioned decision. (T)he filing of such a motion is intended to afford public respondent an opportunity to correct any actual or fancied error attributed to it by way of a re-examination of the legal and factual aspects of the case. Petitioners inaction or negligence under the circumstances is tantamount to a deprivation of the right and opportunity of the respondent Commission to cleanse itself of an error unwittingly committed or vindicate itself of an act unfairly imputed. x x x x x x And