Ester P. Hernandez vs. Commission On Audit

-cy..
2 (" ~
1) 0. ,__,
( L-\." '-7-
~ 171)
J y~
J
,.,--rh "tf°" 1:
3Republic of tbe ,tlbilippines

~upreme (!Court
;ffllanila
EN BANC
NOTICE
II . . . . "'"" • ..JID
Sirs/Mesdames:
Please take notice that the Court en bane issued a Resolution

dated MARCH 19, 2019, which reads as follows:
"G.R. No. 244683 -Ester P. Hernandez, petitioner, v. Commission on

Audit, Office of the Director, Corporate Government Sector, Cluster 6,
represented by Director Joseph B. Anacay, and the Office of the COA
Supervising Auditor - Philippine Amusement and Gaming Corporation
represented by Auditor Belen B. Ladines, respondents.
RESOLUTION
After a careful . review of the allegations, issues, and arguments

adduced in the instant Petition for Certiorari filed under Rule 64, in relation
to Rule 65, of the Rules of Court, the Court resolves to DISMISS the same
for failure of petitioner to show grave abuse of discretion on the part of
respondent Commission on Audit-Commission Proper (COA-CP) in
dismissing her appeal.
In this case, petitioner insists that her Petition for Review filed before
respondent COA-CP was not filed out of time as the 6-month period should
be reckoned from April 22, 2014, the date she received the supporting
documents of the Notice of Disallowance.
The Court does not agree.
Section 3, Rule VII of the 2009 Revised Rules of Procedure of the

Commission on Audit provides:
RULE VII - Petition for Review to the Commission Proper

xxxx
Section 3. Period of Appeal. - The appeal shall be taken within the time
I
remaining of the six (6) months period under Section 4, Rule V, taking
into account the suspension of the running thereof under Section 5 of the
same Rule in case of appeals from the Director's decision, or under
Sections 9 and 10 of Rule VI in case of decision of the ASB.
Notice of Resolution -2- , G.R. No. 244683
March 19, 2019
In this case, records show that, upon receipt of the Notice of

Disallowance on January 8, 2014, petitioner subsequently filed a Motion to
Produce Supporting Documents requesting for the production of copies of
all pertinent supporting documents in relation to the disallowed transaction,
and for the suspension of the reglementary period within which to file her
appeal pending her request for the production of the said documents.
Although COA Director IV Joseph B. Anacay, in his letter dated March 13,
2014, noted petitioner's request for the suspension of the reglementary
period to appeal, there was no showing that such request was granted. Thus,
petitioner should not have assumed that it was granted. It is also significant
to add that, as aptly pointed out by respondent COA-CP, petitioner only had
eleven ( 11) days remaining from the time she received the Cluster Director's
Decision within which to file a Petition for Review before respondent COA-
CP, but it took her 43 days to file the said Petition.
In view of the foregoing, the Court finds no grave abuse of discretion

on the part of respondent COA-CP in dismissing petitioner's appeal for late
filing. It bears stressing that, for grave abuse of discretion to exist, there
must be a capricious and whimsical exercise of judgment tantamount to lack
or excess of jurisdiction - mere abuse of discretion is not enough. 1
ACCORDINGLY, the Court resolves to AFFIRM the Decision

dated December 27, 2017 and Resolution dated December 21, 2018 of
respondent Commission on Audit-Commission Proper." Bersamin, C.J., on
official business. Hernando, J., on leave. (adv44)
Very truly yours,
R 0. ARIC~f TA
Clerk of Court ~
1
VMC Rural Electric Service Cooperative, Inc. v. Court of Appeals, 535 Phil. 345, 358-359 (2006).
Notice of Resolution -3- G.R. No. 244683
March 19, 2019
ATTYS. REODY ANTHONY M. BALISI and THE CHAIRPERSON (reg)

ERIKA MARIE V. GALLEGO (reg) Commission on Audit
Counsel for Petitioner Commonwealth Avenue
4111 and 5111 Floors, S & L Building Quezon City
Dela Rosa cor. Esteban Sts.
Legaspi Village, Makati City
THE DIRECTOR (reg)
,.......Pt19LIC INFORMATION OFFICE (x) Corporate Government Sector
JUDICIAL RECORDS OFFICE (x) Cluster 6
JUDGMENT DIVISION (x) Commission on Audit
Supreme Court Commonwealth Avenue
Quezon City
SUPERVISING AUDITOR (reg)

PAGCOR Corporate Office Annex
Carmen Building, 1105 United Nations Avenue
cor. Ma. Orosa Sts., Ermita, Manila
THE SOLICITOR GENERAL (reg)

Office of the Solicitor General
f
G.R. No. 244683
kat 31919 (URes44) 32219 Amorsolo St., Legaspi Village
Makali City

Ester P. Hernandez vs. Commission On Audit

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Ester P. Hernandez vs. Commission On Audit

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Ester P. Hernandez vs. Commission On Audit

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

-cy..

3Republic of tbe ,tlbilippines

Please take notice that the Court en bane issued a Resolution

"G.R. No. 244683 -Ester P. Hernandez, petitioner, v. Commission on

After a careful . review of the allegations, issues, and arguments

The Court does not agree.

Section 3, Rule VII of the 2009 Revised Rules of Procedure of the

RULE VII - Petition for Review to the Commission Proper

In this case, records show that, upon receipt of the Notice of

In view of the foregoing, the Court finds no grave abuse of discretion

ACCORDINGLY, the Court resolves to AFFIRM the Decision

Very truly yours,

ATTYS. REODY ANTHONY M. BALISI and THE CHAIRPERSON (reg)

SUPERVISING AUDITOR (reg)

THE SOLICITOR GENERAL (reg)

You might also like