G.R. No. 204800 - NATIONAL TRANSMISSION CORPORATION, VS. COMMISSION ON AUDIT, ATTY. JOSEPHINE A. TILAN, REGIONAL CLUSTER DIRECTOR AND MR. ROBERTO G. PADILLA, STATE AUDITOR IV.D E C I S I O N - Supreme Court E-Library

Ruling

WHEREFORE , foregoing premises considered and finding the instant petition to be devoid of merit, the same is hereby DENIED. Accordingly, this Commission affirms LAO-Corporate Decision Nos. 2007-056 and 2007-007 dated July 13, 2007 and February 27, 2007, respectively, and all persons found liable in ND No. 05-037 dated July 5, 2005 should refund the loyalty award received. [24] Despite petitioners Motion for Reconsideration, [25] the COA maintained the aforequoted ruling. Hence, the instant petition. Petitioner alleged that the COA acted without or in excess of jurisdiction or with grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction when it: MISINTERPRETED CSC MEMORANDUM CIRCULAR 06, SERIES OF 2002 (MC 06), AND ERRONEOUSLY STATED THAT AN EMPLOYEE IS ENTITLED TO LOYALTY AWARD ONLY IF HE HAS CONTINUOUSLY RENDERED THE TEN-YEAR SERVICE IN ONE PARTICULAR GOVERNMENT AGENCY. MISTAKENLY RULED THAT THE CONTINUITY OF THE SERVICE OF EMPLOYEES SEPARATED FROM SERVICE DUE TO REORGANIZATION, IS RECOGNIZED ONLY WHEN THE SEPARATION PACKAGE PROVIDED UNDER THE EPIRA IS NOT CLAIMED. [26] Anent the first issue, it is worthy to note that in its Comment, [27] respondents denied having stated in its decision that an employee is entitled to loyalty award only if he has rendered his service in one particular agency. [28] Moreover, respondents did not dispute, and in fact, categorically declared that there was no gap in the services of the NPC employees who were terminated on February 28, 2003 but rehired by Transco the following day or on March 1, 2003, to wit: x x x. This Office agrees that NPC employees did not incur any gap after being separated from NPC on February 23, 2003 since they were rehired by TRANSCO immediately the following day or on March 01, 2003. x x x [29] The main contention of respondents is, therefore, centered on the claim that employees who availed of the separation benefit under the EPIRA Law are considered to have retired. Consequently, upon re-hiring, they are considered new employees; and thus, not entitled to loyalty award. [30] In view of the foregoing, it would appear that the issue left for this Courts resolution is whether or not the NPC employees who were separated from the service because of the reorganization of the electric power industry and who received their separation pay under the EPIRA Law are still entitled to receive loyalty awards under the CSC Memorandum Circular. We rule in the affirmative. Under Section 35, Chapter 5, Subtitle A, Title I, Book V of Executive Order ( E.O .) No. 292, there shall be established a government-wide employee suggestions and incentive awards system which shall be administered under such rules, regulations and standards as may be promulgated by the CSC. Accordingly, the CSC Memorandum Circular was issued setting forth the terms and conditions for granting loyalty awards, to wit: Pursuant to CSC Resolution No. 02-0295 dated Feb. 26, 2002, the Commission amends the policies on t