G.R. No. 155952 - JUANITO A. RUBIO, VS. PIO L. MUNAR, JR..D E C I S I O N - Supreme Court E-Library

Ruling

accordingly, respondent is now estopped from objecting to the CSC Central Offices assumption of jurisdiction over his case. Petitioner cannot now be allowed to adopt an inconsistent posture on this score. Finally and more significantly, petitioner should realize that he is arguing on a wrong premise. The CSC Regional Director did not render any decision or resolution that can be appealed. What has been forwarded by the CSC Regional Office to the CSC Central Office is not a decision or resolution but only an Investigation Report. Hence, in rendering its assailed Resolutions, the CSC Central Office took cognizance of respondents complaint in the exercise of its original jurisdiction over the said case. It did not act by virtue of its appellate authority, as there was nothing to review by way of an appeal. In this respect, the applicable rules of procedure at the time the complaint was filed with the CSC are provided for by CSC Resolution No. 94-0521, otherwise known as the Uniform Rules of Procedure in the Conduct of Administrative Investigations in the Civil Service Commission. More particularly, Sections 35 and 36 of the said Rules provide as follows: Section 35. Report of Investigation . Within fifteen (15) days after the conclusion of the formal investigation a report containing a narration of the material facts established during the investigation as well as the recommendations, shall be submitted to the Commission, through the Regional Director, by the Hearing Officer. The complete records of the case shall be attached to the Report of Investigation. Section 36. Decision after formal investigation . The Commission shall render a decision in writing within thirty (30) days from the termination of the investigation or receipt of the Report of Investigation, together with the complete records of the case. This is the procedure appropriately followed by the CSC Regional Office and the CSC Central Office. WHEREFORE , the instant petition is DENIED for utter lack of merit. Costs against petitioner. SO ORDERED.