G.R. No. 173115 - ATTY. VIRGILIO R. GARCIA, VS. EASTERN TELECOMMUNICATIONS PHILIPPINES, INC. AND ATTY. SALVADOR C. HIZON.[G.R. NOS. 173163-64]EASTERN TELECOMMUNICATIONS PHILIPPINES, INC. AND ATTY. SALVADOR C. HIZON, VS. ATTY. VIRGILIO R. GARCIA.D E C I S I O N - Supreme Court E-Library

Ruling

WHEREFORE, premises all considered, judgment is hereby rendered, finding the preventive suspension and the dismissal illegal and ordering the respondents to: Reinstate complainant to his former position without loss of seniority rights and other benefits appurtenant to the position that complainant received prior to the illegal dismissal; Pay complainant his backwages which for purpose of appeal is computed to the amount of P4,200,000.00 (P150,000 x 28); Pay complainant Moral damages in the amount of P1,000,000.00 and Exemplary damages in the amount of P500,000.00. [23] On 14 November 2002, Atty. Garcia filed an Ex-Parte Motion for the Issuance of a Writ of Execution. [24] On 20 November 2002, Labor Arbiter Reyes issued a Writ of Execution insofar as the reinstatement aspect of the decision was concerned. [25] ETPI and Atty. Hizon filed a Very Urgent Motion to Lift/Quash Writ of Execution on 28 November 2002. [26] Per Sheriff's Return on the Writ of Execution, said writ remained unsatisfied because ETPI and Atty. Hizon refused to reinstate Atty. Garcia to his former position. [27] On 29 November 2002, Atty. Garcia filed an Ex-Parte Motion for the Issuance of an Alias Writ of Execution praying that said writ be issued ordering the sheriff to enforce the decision by garnishing the amount of P450,000.00 representing his monthly salaries for two months and 13 th month pay from any of ETPI's bank accounts. [28] Atty. Garcia manifested that he was no longer filing any responsive pleading to the Very Urgent Motion to Lift/Quash Writ of Execution because the Labor Arbiter lost jurisdiction over the case when an appeal had been perfected. [29] In an Order dated 10 December 2002, Labor Arbiter Reyes denied the Very Urgent Motion to Lift/Quash Writ of Execution, explaining that it still had jurisdiction over the reinstatement aspect of the decision, notwithstanding the appeal taken, and that the grounds relied upon for the lifting or quashing of the writ were not valid grounds. [30] Labor Arbiter Reyes subsequently issued a 1 st Alias Writ of Execution dated 11 December 2002 ordering the sheriff to proceed to the premises of ETPI to reinstate Atty. Garcia and/or garnish the amounts prayed for. [31] Per Sheriff's Return dated 17 January 2003, the 1 st Alias Writ of Execution was satisfied with the amount of P450,000.00 being released for proper disposition to Atty. Garcia. [32] ETPI and Atty. Hizon appealed the decision to the NLRC, filing a Notice of Appeal and Memorandum of Appeal, [33] which appeal was opposed by Atty. Garcia. [34] The appeal was docketed as NLRC NCR CA Case No. 028901-01. ETPI and Atty. Hizon filed a Supplemental Appeal Memorandum dated 23 January 2003 (With Very Urgent Motion for Issuance of Temporary Restraining Order). [35] In a Manifestation ad Cautelam dated 28 January 2003, without waiving their right to continue to question the jurisdiction of the Labor Arbiter, they informed the Labor Arbiter that they had filed a Supplemental Ap