G.R. No. 152032 - GALLARDO U. LUCERO, VS. HON. COURT OF APPEALS AND PHILIPPINE NATIONAL BANK.D E C I S I O N - Supreme Court E-Library

Ruling

WHEREFORE, the foregoing premises considered, the respondent bank is hereby declared guilty of having illegally dismissed the complainant; and it is hereby ordered: "1) to immediately reinstate complainant without loss of seniority rights and privileges; "2) to pay his backwages inclusive of his allowances, other benefits or their monetary equivalent, based on his last gross salary rate of P8,009.00 and computed from the time his compensation was withheld up to the time of his reinstatement, whether actual or in the payroll; and "3) attorney's fees equivalent to 10% of the above awards. "All other claims are dismissed for lack of factual basis to award the same." [1] The PNB filed in due time a motion for reconsideration which was denied by the NLRC in its resolution of 28 April 2000. Consistently with the decision of the NLRC, Lucero was meanwhile reinstated to his former position by the PNB, and he resumed his functions in the bank. The PNB, nevertheless, filed with the Court of Appeals on 07 July 2000 a petition for certiorari under Rule 65 of the 1997 Rules of Procedure, contending that the NLRC committed grave abuse of discretion in assuming jurisdiction over the case and in ruling that Lucero's dismissal was illegal. The PNB argued that since Lucero was dismissed on 24 May 1996, or prior to its privatization (on 27 May 1996), the case should have been decided on the basis of the Civil Service Law and not the Labor Code; that the NLRC erred in finding, even assuming that the NLRC had jurisdiction to take cognizance of the case, that Lucero was illegally dismissed; and that the probationary employment was validly terminated because of his "unsatisfactory" performance. On 31 July 2001, the Court of Appeals rendered a decision to the effect that the NLRC properly assumed jurisdiction over the case; nevertheless, it found Lucero not to have been illegally dismissed. The appellate court held: "WHEREFORE, the petition is GRANTED. The assailed decision of the National Labor Relations Commission is REVERSED and SET ASIDE, with the result that the complaint of Gallardo U. Lucero for illegal dismissal against the Philippine National Bank is DISMISSED." [2] Lucero filed a motion for reconsideration; the Court of Appeals denied, in its resolution of 24 January 2002, the motion. In the instant petition, petitioner Lucero focused his argument on the following asseverations; thus: "The Court of Appeals committed a serious legal error in failing to hold that petitioner was already a regular employee at the time of his dismissal and hence, could not be dismissed without just or authorized cause. "The Court of Appeals legally erred in not holding that petitioner's subsequently high performance rating should have been taken in his favor." [3] The petition lacks merit. It would appear that on 18 January 1996, petitioner was hired by Excellent Manpower Services, a manning agency, which used to supply the manpower requirements of the PNB, to work as an administra