Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 28 views

    3) Mangaser - Beja SR V CA (d2017)

    Uploaded by

    Malcolm Cruz
    The Supreme Court ruled that: 1) The PPA GM has the authority to issue preventive suspensions as a precautionary measure during an investigation and does not need approval. 2) However, in this case the PPA GM's complaint to the AAB was premature without seeking approval from the PPA Board of Directors first. 3) While the DOTC and AAB have jurisdiction over PPA personnel, in this case involving a Terminal Supervisor below Assistant GM they did not have authority and their actions were reversed.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    3) Mangaser - Beja SR V CA (d2017)

    Uploaded by

    Malcolm Cruz
    28 views2 pages
    The Supreme Court ruled that: 1) The PPA GM has the authority to issue preventive suspensions as a precautionary measure during an investigation and does not need approval. 2) However, in this case the PPA GM's complaint to the AAB was premature without seeking approval from the PPA Board of Directors first. 3) While the DOTC and AAB have jurisdiction over PPA personnel, in this case involving a Terminal Supervisor below Assistant GM they did not have authority and their actions were reversed.

    Original Description:

    hh

    Original Title

    3) Mangaser - Beja Sr v CA [d2017]

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The Supreme Court ruled that: 1) The PPA GM has the authority to issue preventive suspensions as a precautionary measure during an investigation and does not need approval. 2) However, in this case the PPA GM's complaint to the AAB was premature without seeking approval from the PPA Board of Directors first. 3) While the DOTC and AAB have jurisdiction over PPA personnel, in this case involving a Terminal Supervisor below Assistant GM they did not have authority and their actions were reversed.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    28 views2 pages

    3) Mangaser - Beja SR V CA (d2017)

    Uploaded by

    Malcolm Cruz
    The Supreme Court ruled that: 1) The PPA GM has the authority to issue preventive suspensions as a precautionary measure during an investigation and does not need approval. 2) However, in this case the PPA GM's complaint to the AAB was premature without seeking approval from the PPA Board of Directors first. 3) While the DOTC and AAB have jurisdiction over PPA personnel, in this case involving a Terminal Supervisor below Assistant GM they did not have authority and their actions were reversed.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 2

    Digest Author: Bugsy PROVISION: Book IV, Chapter 7 of the Administrative Code of 1987

    BEJA, SR. v. COURT OF APPEALS (1992)


    Petitioner: Fidencio Y. Beja, Sr. RULING + RATIO:
    Respondent: Court of Appeals, Hon. Reinerio Reyes, Commodore YES
    Rogelio Dayan, DTC, AAB, Justice Onofre Villaluz, DOTC  The PPA GM is the disciplining authority who may, by himself and
    Ponencia: Romero, J. without the approval of the PPA Board of Directors, subject a
    respondent in an administrative case to preventive suspension.
    DOCTRINE: An attached agency has larger measure of independence borne  Preventive suspension is not a penalty in itself and is merely a
    by the lateral relationship between the Department and the attached agency. measure of precaution so that the employee who is charged may be
    separated, for obvious reasons, from the scene of his alleged
    FACTS: misfeasance while the same is being investigated.
    1. BEJA was employed by PFA as arrastre supervisor in 1975. He
    became Assistant Port Operations Officer in 1977. NO
    2. As a result of the reorganization of the PHILIPPINE PORTS  P.D No. 857 substituted P.D No. 505 and "attached" (for policy and
    AUTHORITY (PPA), he was appointed Terminal Supervisor. program coordination) the PPA to the then Department of Public
    3. PPA General Manager, DAYAN, filed an Administrative Case against Works, Transportation and Communication.
    BEJA and one VILLALUZ, allegedly erroneously assessed storage o "Attachment" of an agency to a Department is one of
    fees resulting in the loss of P38,150.77 the three administrative relationships mentioned in Book
    4. The two were preventively suspended. But after a preliminary IV, Chapter 7 of the Administrative Code of 1987, the
    investigation conducted by the district attorney, the case was other two being "Supervision and Control" and
    "considered closed for lack of merit." "Administrative Control."
    5. Few months after, another charge sheet was filed against BEJA by o An Attached Agency has a larger measure of
    the PPA GM also for dishonesty, grave misconduct, violation of independence from the Department to which it is
    reasonable office rules and regulations, conduct prejudicial to the attached than the one which is under departmental
    best interest of the service and for being notoriously undesirable. supervision and control or administrative supervision.
    6. The PPA GM indorsed it to the ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION BOARD (Borne by the "lateral relationship" between the
    for "appropriate action." Department and the Attached Agency)
    7. AAB exonerated BEJA from the charge against him and VILLALUZ, o With respect to management of personnel, an Attached
    and ordered that BEJA be dismissed from service. AAB also Agency is free from Departmental interference and
    pronounced BEJA to be disqualified from re-employment and control.
    recommended that his eligibility be cancelled.  THE PPA GM, along with the power to investigate personnel below
    8. BEJA elevated the case to the SC through an appeal by certiorari the rank of Assistant Manager who may be charged with an
    with preliminary injunction and/or temporary restraining order. administrative offense, has the power to remove erring employees
    with the approval of the PPA BOD.
    ISSUES:  In this case, PPA GM's complaint to the AAB was premature, there
     WON PPA GM has the authority to issue preventive suspension being failure on the part of PPA GM to seek the approval of the
     WON the DOTC and/or the AAB has the jurisdiction to initiate and PPA BOD.
    hear administrative cases against PPA personnel below the rank of
    Assistant GM
    DISPOSITION: the decision regarding the power of the PPA GM to subject
    BEJA to preventive suspension is AFFIRMED and that of the jurisdiction of
    the DOTC and/or ABB to act on BEJA's case is hereby REVERSED.

    You might also like