G.R. NO. 158758 - P.J. LHUILLIER INC. AND PHILIPPE J. LHUILLIER, VS. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION AND HERMINIA MONTENEGRO.

Ruling

WHEREFORE, respondents are hereby directed to reinstate: Vincent Montenegro to his former position at the Bauan Branch effective August 1, 1999 and pay him full backwages in the amount of P173,687.50; Herminia Montenegro to her former position in Batangas/Taal Area effective August 1, 1999 and to pay her full backwages in the amount of P228,562.50; Carlos Sara to his former position at the Lemery, Batangas-Branch effective August 1, 1991 (sic) and to pay him full backwages in the amount of P166,075.00; Marites Noble to her former position effective August 1, 1991 (sic) and to her (sic) pay her partial backwages in the amount of P155,691.25. [6] From the decision of the Labor Arbiter, the company appealed to the NLRC. The said commission rendered a decision, to wit: WHEREFORE, the decision of the Labor Arbiter a quo is hereby REVERSED and SET ASIDE with respect to complainants VICENTE MONTENEGRO, MARITES NOBLE and CARLOS SARA. The case of constructive dismissal and illegal dismissal filed by them respectively are hereby DISMISSED. However, with respect to complainant MS. HERMINIA MONTENEGRO, the findings of the Labor Arbiter stand and she is entitled to reinstatement with backwages. Considering the strained relations between the parties, in lieu of reinstatement, she is entitled to separation pay computed at one half (1/2) month salary for every year of service, a fraction of six (6) months shall be computed as one full year. Receiving a salary of P10,620.00 based on her complaint, her separation pay is computed at P37,170.00. [7] The parties thereafter filed their respective motions for reconsideration. For her part, Herminia Montenegro moved to have the part of the said decision awarding her separation pay computed at one-half (1/2) month salary for every year of service be reconsidered. On 11 July 2001, the NLRC issued a resolution denying the motion of the complainant employees. It held that: Finding no palpable or patent error committed to warrant the modification and/or reversal of the same, complainants Motion for Reconsideration is hereby DENIED for lack of merit. [8] Thereafter, the petitioners filed a Petition for Certiorari, under Rule 65 of the Revised Rules of Court, before the Court of Appeals, questioning the NLRC Decision only insofar as the declaration of illegality of Herminia Montenegros dismissal is concerned. Vincent Montenegro, Carlos Pedro Sara and Marites Noble for their part, however, failed to elevate to the appellate court the decision of the commission which dismissed their complaint altogether. The dismissal of their complaint, thus, attained finality. The petitioners maintained that the NLRC erred in affirming the finding of illegal dismissal with respect to Herminia Montenegro because of the following reasons: The Labor Arbiter failed to examine and appreciate the most material evidence: the stark difference in the signature appearing in the Affidavit of Loss and in the pertinent pawnshop tickets. Even the naked ey