|
Friday, June 30, 2006
Civil service office rejects provincial exec’s appeal
By Albert B. Lacanlale
* Alingcastre questions CDC's jurisdiction on case
* CSC: Guv's signature in false DTR does not make it regular
CITY OF SAN FERNANDO -- The Civil Service Commission (CSC) has turned down the motion for reconsideration filed by Provincial General Services Office (GSO) chief, Lulu Alingcastre, over an administrative case that the commission decided against the official.
In a seven-page response to Alingcastre's June 15 motion for reconsideration, CSC director IV Karin Litz P. Zerna shrugged off the GSO head's appeal on the commission's decision to dismiss and bar her from government service and strip her of retirement benefits, among other penalties.
The administrative case stemmed from a formal charge against her based on an anonymous complaint dated August 13, 2004, which alleged that the department heads of the provincial government "travel abroad almost every month."
Subsequently, a CSC audit team conducted an investigation and among the findings was that Alingcastre, an engineer, submitted two daily time records (DTRs) for July 2004 and although she was included in the travel authority, she filed a sick leave of absence for July 14-16, 2004.
During the investigation, Alingcastre admitted committing certain mistakes on filing of DTR and leaves of absences, upon which the CSC decision took off.
However, in her motion for reconsideration, Alingcastre questioned the jurisdiction of the CSC on her case.
She contested: "[The CSC] has no original jurisdiction to commence the instant administrative case against [me]."
But Zerna said the complaint against Alingcastre was initiated by the commission because the alleged acts or omissions were committed in the City of San Fernando, Pampanga, which is within the territorial jurisdiction of the CSC Region 3 office.
Even then, Zerna explained, the active participation of Alingcastre in the proceedings of the case was tantamount to accepting that the commission has jurisdiction over her case.
To support this, Zerna quoted a Supreme Court decision on a similar issue, which stated that: "While an order or decision rendered without jurisdiction is a total nullity and may be assailed at any stage, active participation in the proceedings in the court which rendered the order or decision will bar such party from attacking its jurisdiction..."
She also denied Alingcastre's claim that the general services officer was not afforded due process as she was found guilty of an offense other than that charged, that she was a stranger and not a party to the administrative case of dishonesty.
Though she explained that the procedures in an administrative case differ from that of a criminal case, Alingcastre has admitted committing certain mistakes with regard to the filing of her DTR and leaves of absence.
"During the formal investigation," Zerna's order added, "Alingcastre manifested, through counsel, that she would just be filing her Position Paper in lieu of continuous hearings, after which the case would be deemed submitted for resolution."
Alingcastre, in her motion for reconsideration, contested further that the evidence is insufficient in finding her guilty as charged.
The department head even dropped the name of Governor Mark T. Lapid in a futile attempt to justify her irregular DTRs.
"Noteworthy also is the fact that Governor Mark T. Lapid approved the Respondent's application for sick leave for the period from (July 14 to 16), 2004.
"This office is not persuaded by the twisted logic of the respondent," answered Zerna. "The governor's signature in an irregular or false DTR does not make the same regular."
(June 30, 2006 issue)
Write letter to the editor. Click here.
Join the Sun.Star message board. Click here. |
|
[return to top]
[home]
[network page]
|
LOCAL NEWS
BUSINESS
OPINION
SPORTS
LIFESTYLE
FEATURE
|
