Anda di halaman 1dari 1

BERNARDO v.

CA (2004)

1) No Due Process: Petitioner argues that the acts invoked by the CSC
as constituting the offense of grave misconduct and conduct
prejudicial to the best interest of the service were not raised in the
formal charge.

FACTS:
Petitioner Armando F. Bernardo entered the government as Claims
Adjuster of the LBP and then became Head of the Loans and Discount
Division of the bank while maintaining a savings account in the said
branch. Bernardo then deposited an amount of 500k and then
photocopied such page in the passbook reflecting the deposit and then
withdrew the said amount.
In his capacity as a treasury in trust of Markay Trading, he executed a
treasurers affidavit falsifying that 25% of the capital stock has been
subscribed and paid and received by him in accordance with the
corporation code. The Articles of Incorporation had then been
registered with SEC. However, it turned out that while Bernardo was
an elected treasurer of MTMSI, he never opened an account with the
LBP, for the account of the said corporation.
The LBP then filed a formal charge against Bernardo charging him of
gross neglect, grave misconduct, conduct prejudicial to the best
interest of the bank, and serious violation of CSC rules. The hearing
officer issued a resolution finding the Respondent guilty for engaging in
business, occupation or vocation without securing the permission of
the Land Bank in violation of Sec. 36 of P.D. 807 and, secondly, for
committing acts of falsification amounting to GRAVE MISCONDUCT in
office to which CSC affirmed his dismissal of service.
Bernardo argued that he was deprived of his right to due process
because he was found administratively guilty for acts which were not
included in the formal charges lodged against him by the LBP, his
employer. However, the CSC denied the motion.

ISSUE:
1) W/N

CSC Resolutions were promulgated in violation of the

petitioners constitutional right to due process.

2) W/N Bernardo is guilty of Grave misconduct.

HELD: Petition denied. CA ruling is affirmed.

We agree that the CSC erred in finding the petitioner administratively


liable for depositing P500,000 in his name as treasurer-in-trust of
MTMSI, and withdrawing the amount prior to the incorporation
thereof in the absence of any resolution of its Board of Directors
authorizing him to do so, although not alleged in the formal charges.
The petitioner was deprived of his right to be informed of the
charges against him, and to accord him the right to adduce evidence
to controvert the said charges.

2) However, we agree with the CA that the CSC did not err in finding
the petitioner guilty of grave misconduct and conduct prejudicial to
the best interest of the service based on the evidence on record.

We reject the petitioners contention that there was no legal and factual
basis for the decision of the MSPB and the resolution of the CSC. The
respondent LBP adduced the requisite quantum of evidence to prove
the second charge.Per certificate of the LBP, Baliuag Branch, the
petitioner had no deposit account as treasurer-in-trust of MTMSI in
the said bank.20 The petitioner deposited the amount ofP500,000 in
his personal account, Savings Account No. 28-110 on January 27,
1986.21 This transaction was reflected in his passbook.A cursory
reading of the said page would lead one to conclude that the
petitioner had deposited the said amount, without disclosing,
however, that he also withdrew the said amount on the same
day.The petitioner thus made a false statement in his January 27,
1986 Letter to the SEC, when he stated that as treasurer-in-trust of
the MTMSI he had depositedP500,000 in his account in the LBP,
Baliuag Branch, when the truth of the matter was, the money was
deposited in the petitioners personal savings account and was also
withdrawn on the same day.

Accountability:

Being a public officer, petitioner is enjoined by no less

than the highest law of the land and his employer (LBP) at all times
to be accountable to the people and serve with utmost responsibility,
integrity, loyalty and efficiency (1987 Constitution).

Anda mungkin juga menyukai