G.R. No. 193990 - EASTERN SHIPPING LINES, INC., AND/OR CONGRESSMAN ERWIN L. CHIONGBIAN, VS. JULIO C. CANJA.D E C I S I O N - Supreme Court E-Library

Ruling

WHEREFORE, premises considered, the instant Petition for Certiorari is hereby DISMISSED. The Resolutions dated November 29, 2009 and January 15, 2010 of public respondent NLRC are AFFIRMED with MODIFICATION in that private respondent Julio C. Canja's separation pay must be equivalent to one (1) month pay for every year of service to be reckoned from the first day of employment up to the finality of this decision, while his full backwages are to be computed from the date of illegal dismissal up to the finality of the decision. Let the records of this case be remanded to the Computation and Examination Unit of the NLRC for the proper computation of the amounts due private respondent. [13] The appellate court reasoned that there was no convincing evidence to show that Canja intended to abandon his job. It ruled that Canja's filing of illegal dismissal against petitioner is inconsistent with the claim of abandonment. Petitioners moved for reconsideration, but was denied in a Resolution [14] dated October 7, 2010. Thus, the instant petition for review on certiorari raising the lone issue of: WHETHER OR NOT THE HONORABLE COURT OF APPEALS ERRED IN ITS DECISION DATED 20 JULY 2010 AND 7 OCTOBER 2010 WHEN IT MODIFIED THE RESOLUTION OF THE NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION DATED 29 NOVEMBER 2009 ON THE BASIS OF A NEW CASE WHICH WAS DECIDED BY THE SUPREME COURT DESPITE THE FACT THAT THIS CASE HAD ALREADY BECOME FINAL AND EXECUTORY AND SATISFIED. [15] In essence, petitioners argue that because the NLRC Decision had already become final and executory, as in fact there was already an entry of judgment, the same can no longer be modified. We disagree. In Philippine Transmarine Carriers, Inc. v. Legaspi, [16] the Court has the occasion to rule that a petition for certiorari is not rendered moot by the mere fact that there was already an executed NLRC decision. For clarification, we quote: Section 14, Rule VII of the 2011 NLRC Rules of Procedure provides that decisions, resolutions or orders of the NLRC shall become final and executory after ten (10) calendar days from receipt thereof by the parties, and entry of judgment shall be made upon the expiration of the said period. In St. Martin Funeral Home v. NLRC , however, it was ruled that judicial review of decisions of the NLRC may be sought via a petition for certiorari before the CA under Rule 65 of the Rules of Court; and under Section 4 thereof, petitioners are allowed sixty (60) days from notice of the assailed order or resolution within which to file the petition. Hence, in cases where a petition for certiorari is filed after the expiration of the 10-day period tinder the 2011 NLRC Rules of Procedure hut within the 60-day period under Rule 65 of the Rules of Court, the CA can grant the petition and modify, nullify and reverse a decision or resolution of the NLRC. [17] In this case, the NLRC Decision was dated November 29, 2009. Within the ten (10) days from receipt of the Decision, petitioners filed a moti