Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Villanueva JR V NLRC
Villanueva JR V NLRC
_______________
* THIRD DIVISION.
244
https://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000017bec70ff1a4e2c8dfd000d00d40059004a/t/?o=False 1/14
9/16/21, 10:26 AM SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 672
245
https://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000017bec70ff1a4e2c8dfd000d00d40059004a/t/?o=False 2/14
9/16/21, 10:26 AM SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 672
246
right of the employer to expect from its workers not only good
performance, adequate work and diligence, but also good conduct
and loyalty. The employer may not be compelled to continue to
employ such persons whose continuance in the service will
patently be inimical to its interests.
MENDOZA, J.:
This petition for review on certiorari assails the
December 13, 2006 Decision1 of the Court of Appeals (CA)
in CA-G.R. SP. No. 95826 which dismissed the petition
challenging the November 30, 20042 and June 20, 20063
Resolutions of the National Labor Relations Commission
(NLRC) holding that petitioner Vicente Villanueva
(Villanueva) was validly dismissed by respondent company
Manila Electric Company (Meralco) on account of serious
misconduct and loss of trust and confidence.
The Facts
Since 1990, Villanueva had been employed with Meralco
as bill collector, teller and branch representative.
Sometime in
_______________
1 Rollo, pp. 25-44. Penned by Associate Justice Martin S. Villarama, Jr.
(now member of this Court) and concurred into by Associate Justice Lucas
P. Bersamin (also present member of this Court) and Associate Justice
Monina Arevalo-Zenarosa, of the then Seventh Division of the Court of
Appeals.
2 Id., at pp. 57-67.
3 Id., at pp. 68-82.
247
_______________
4 Id., at pp. 123-137.
248
_______________
5 Id., at pp. 121-122.
6 Id., at p. 138.
249
_______________
7 Id., at p. 139.
8 Id., at p. 140.
250
https://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000017bec70ff1a4e2c8dfd000d00d40059004a/t/?o=False 5/14
9/16/21, 10:26 AM SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 672
_______________
9 Id., at pp. 148-149.
251
_______________
10 Id., at pp. 71-82.
252
x x x
WHEREFORE, premises considered, respondent Manila Electric
Company is hereby ordered to take back within ten (10) days from
receipt hereof, herein complainant Vicente Villanueva, Jr. to any
substantially equivalent position not dependent on the use of CMS, or by
payroll reinstatement, at the option of the former, without loss of
seniority rights but without backwages.
Complainant’s prayer for damages is hereby dismissed for lack of
merit.”11 [Emphasis supplied]
https://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000017bec70ff1a4e2c8dfd000d00d40059004a/t/?o=False 7/14
9/16/21, 10:26 AM SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 672
_______________
11 Id., at pp. 81-82.
12 Id., at pp. 57-67.
253
All other claims are hereby DENIED for lack of merit.”13
_______________
13 Id., at pp. 66-67.
14 Id., at pp. 95-100.
15 Id., at pp. 175-176.
16 Id., at pp. 69-70.
254
https://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000017bec70ff1a4e2c8dfd000d00d40059004a/t/?o=False 8/14
9/16/21, 10:26 AM SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 672
Grounds
I.
THE HONORABLE COURT OF APPEALS ERRED IN NOT
FINDING GRAVE ABUSE OF DISCRETION AMOUNTING
TO LACK OR EXCESS OF JURISDICTION ON THE PART
OF THE PUBLIC RESPONDENT’S ACT OF REVERSING
THE DECISION OF THE LABOR ARBITER A QUO, AND
DECLARING PETITIONER’S DISMISSAL AS VALID AND
JUSTIFIED, AND SUBSEQUENTLY DENYING
PETITIONER’S MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION.
II.
THE HONORABLE COURT OF APPEALS ERRED IN NOT
FINDING THAT PUBLIC RESPONDENT COMMITTED
GRAVE ABUSE OF DISCRETION IN NOT ACTING UPON
_______________
17 Id., at pp. 39-43.
255
_______________
18 Id., at p. 17.
19 527 Phil. 230, 242-245; 494 SCRA 643, 654-655 (2006).
256
https://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000017bec70ff1a4e2c8dfd000d00d40059004a/t/?o=False 10/14
9/16/21, 10:26 AM SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 672
_______________
20 Id.
21 Nokom v. National Labor Relations Commission, 390 Phil. 1228,
1244; 336 SCRA 97, 111-112 (2000).
257
_______________
22 Mabeza v. National Labor Relations Commission, 338 Phil. 386; 271
SCRA 670 (1997).
258
https://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000017bec70ff1a4e2c8dfd000d00d40059004a/t/?o=False 11/14
9/16/21, 10:26 AM SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 672
259
https://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000017bec70ff1a4e2c8dfd000d00d40059004a/t/?o=False 12/14
9/16/21, 10:26 AM SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 672
_______________
23 Deles, Jr. v. National Labor Relations Commission, 384 Phil. 271,
281-282; 327 SCRA 540, 548 (2000).
24 Meralco v. National Labor Relations Commission, 331 Phil. 838, 847;
263 SCRA 531, 538 (1996).
25 Agabon v. National Labor Relations Commission, 485 Phil. 248, 279;
442 SCRA 573, 607 (2004).
260
Petition denied.
https://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000017bec70ff1a4e2c8dfd000d00d40059004a/t/?o=False 13/14
9/16/21, 10:26 AM SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 672
_______________
** Per Special Order No. 1228 dated June 6, 2012.
*** Designated Acting Member in lieu of Associate Justice Presbitero
J. Velasco, Jr., per Special Order No. 1229-A dated June 6, 2012.
261
——o0o——
https://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000017bec70ff1a4e2c8dfd000d00d40059004a/t/?o=False 14/14