Cited Laws
TL;DR — Ruling
WHEREFORE, there being substantial evidence, respondents DANILO R. RUMBAWA, CECILIA C. ALMAJOSE, ROMULO P. ARCILLA, JR.
WHEREFORE, there being substantial evidence, respondents DANILO R. RUMBAWA, CECILIA C. ALMAJOSE, ROMULO P. ARCILLA, JR., EUGENE P. DURUSAN, VICTORINA A. OLEA, EDUARDO L. TORRES, DANILO O. COLLANTES, and VIRGILIO R. ESGUERRA are found GUILTY of Dishonesty, Grave Misconduct, and Conduct Prejudicial to the Best Interest of the Service in connection with the procurement of Bio Nature Liquid Fertilizer. Accordingly, they are meted out the penalty of DISMISSAL FROM THE SERVICE which shall carry with it the cancellation of their eligibility, forfeiture of retirement benefits, and perpetual disqualification from holding public office, pursuant to Section 52 of the Revised Rules on Administrative Cases in the Civil Service (RRACCS). In case the penalty of DISMISSAL FROM THE SERVICE can no longer be implemented due to retirement, resignation or separation from the service for any reason, the alternative penalty of FINE EQUIVALENT TO ONE YEAR SALARY of each respondent shall be imposed, with the same accessory penalties thereof. FURTHERMORE, the administrative charges against respondents CARLOS Z. RODENAS, MA. TERESA E. LASQUETY and ROMEO G. BELLEZA are DISMISSED for insufficiency of evidence. SO ORDERED.
G.R. No. 237330 - ALDRIN MADREO, VS. LUCILO R. BAYRON.
G.R. No. 237330 -
CaseG.R. No. 238563 - MANSUE NERY LUKBAN, VS. OMBUDSMAN CONCHITA CARPIOMORALES.DECISION - Supreme Court E-Library
G.R. No. 238563 -
CaseG.R. No. 231042 - ARTURO O. MIÑAO, VS. OFFICE OF THE OMBUDSMAN (MINDANAO).D E C I S I O N - Supreme Court E-Library
G.R. No. 231042 -