G.R. NO. 173076 - MT. CARMEL COLLEGE, VS. JOCELYN RESUENA, EDDIE VILLALON, SYLVIA SEDAYON AND ZONSAYDA EMNACE.

Ruling

WHEREFORE, premises considered, judgment is hereby rendered ordering [herein petitioner] Mount Carmel College represented by Fr. Modesto Malandac to pay [herein respondents] Jocelyn Resuena, Zonsayda Emnace, Eddie Villalon and Sylvia Sedayon, their respective 13 th month pay, separation pay and attorneys fee in the total sum of THREE HUNDRED THIRTY-FOUR THOUSAND EIGHT HUNDRED SEVENTY-FIVE PESOS AND 67/100 (P334,875.47) to be deposited with this office within ten (10) days from receipt of this decision. The complaint for moral and exemplary damages is hereby dismissed for lack of legal basis. All other claims are hereby dismissed for lack of merit. [6] On 9 September 1999, Labor Arbiter Drilon issued to the parties a Notice of Judgment/Decision of his 25 May 1999 Decision. The notice indicated that a decision of the Labor Arbiter reinstating a dismissed or separated employee, in so far as the reinstatement aspect is concerned, shall immediately be executory, even pending appeal. The employee shall either be admitted back to work under the same terms and conditions prevailing prior to his dismissal or separation or at the option of the employee (sic) merely reinstated in the payroll. [7] In the meantime, petitioner appealed to the NLRC Fourth Division in Cebu City, seeking the reversal of the portion of the Labor Arbiters Decision dated 25 May 1999 awarding separation pay to respondents. The NLRC dismissed the appeal in its Decision dated 30 October 2001. In the same Decision dismissing the appeal, the NLRC reversed and modified the 25 May 1999 Decision of the Labor Arbiter, and declared the termination of respondents to be illegal. It ordered the reinstatement of respondents, with payment of backwages or payment of separation pay in lieu thereof. The pertinent portion of the 30 October 2001 NLRC Decision reads: We rule that complainants were illegally dismissed and must therefore be ordered reinstated with payment of backwages from the time they were illegally dismissed up to the time of their actual reinstatement. All other claims are hereby dismissed for lack of merit. WHEREFORE, premises considered the instant appeal is hereby DISMISSED for lack of merit and the appealed decision is hereby AFFIRMED with modification ordering the [herein petitioner] the payment of the backwages of the [herein respondents] from May 15, 1998 up to May 25, 1999, further directing the reinstatement of the [respondents] to their original positions without loss of seniority or in lieu thereof the payment of their separation pay as computed in the appealed decision. [8] Petitioner filed a Motion for Reconsideration of the 30 October 2001 Decision of the NLRC. The said Motion was denied in the 19 June 2003 Resolution of the NLRC. The case was elevated to the Court of Appeals via a Special Civil Action for Certiorari and Prohibition , docketed as CA-G.R. SP No. 80639 where petitioner assailed the aforementioned NLRC Decision dated 30 October 2001 and Resolution dated