Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Board of Trustees Vs Velasco, G R No 170436, February 2, 2011 Kinds

    Uploaded by

    Mila Perez
    22 views2 pages
    This case involved two government employees, Velasco and Molina, who were placed under 90-day preventive suspension for participating in a demonstration against alleged corruption. [1] After serving their suspension, they were entitled to reinstatement and step increment, but the GSIS denied the increment citing an internal resolution. [2] The court ruled the resolution void, finding that employees under investigation are presumed innocent until proven guilty and remedial social legislation should be construed liberally in favor of employees. [3] The court declared Velasco and Molina were entitled to their step increment.

    Original Description:

    Case Digest

    Original Title

    Board_of_Trustees_vs_Velasco,_G_R_No_170436,_February_2,_2011_Kinds

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    This case involved two government employees, Velasco and Molina, who were placed under 90-day preventive suspension for participating in a demonstration against alleged corruption. [1] After serving their suspension, they were entitled to reinstatement and step increment, but the GSIS denied the increment citing an internal resolution. [2] The court ruled the resolution void, finding that employees under investigation are presumed innocent until proven guilty and remedial social legislation should be construed liberally in favor of employees. [3] The court declared Velasco and Molina were entitled to their step increment.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf or txt
    22 views2 pages

    Board of Trustees Vs Velasco, G R No 170436, February 2, 2011 Kinds

    Uploaded by

    Mila Perez
    This case involved two government employees, Velasco and Molina, who were placed under 90-day preventive suspension for participating in a demonstration against alleged corruption. [1] After serving their suspension, they were entitled to reinstatement and step increment, but the GSIS denied the increment citing an internal resolution. [2] The court ruled the resolution void, finding that employees under investigation are presumed innocent until proven guilty and remedial social legislation should be construed liberally in favor of employees. [3] The court declared Velasco and Molina were entitled to their step increment.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf or txt
    of 2

    Board of Trustees vs. Velasco, G.R. No.

    170436, February 2, 2011 (Kinds of AdministrativeRules


    and Regulations

    FACTS

    This is a petition for review of the 24 September 2004 Decision and the 7 October 2005 Order
    of the Regional Trial Court of Manila, Branch 19 (trial court), in Civil Case No. 03-108389. In its
    24 September 2004 Decision, the trial court granted respondents Albert M. Velasco and Mario I.
    Molina’s (respondents) petition for prohibition. In its 7 October 2005 Order, the trial court
    denied petitioners Board of Trustees of the Government Service Insurance System (GSIS) and
    Winston F. Garcia’s (petitioners) motion for reconsideration.

    On 23 May 2002, petitioners charged respondents administratively with grave misconduct and
    placed them under preventive suspension for 90 days. Respondents were charged for their
    alleged participation in the demonstration held by some GSIS employees denouncing the
    alleged corruption in the GSIS and calling for the ouster of its president and general manager,
    petitioner Winston F. Garcia.

    Respondents were placed under preventive suspension for 90 days beginning on 23 May
    2002.1avvphi1 Their preventive suspension ended on 21 August 2002. Therefore, after serving
    the period of their preventive suspension and without the administrative case being finally
    resolved, respondents should have been reinstated and, after serving the same number of days
    of their suspension, entitled to the grant of step increment.

    The pertinent provision of Resolution No. 372 provides:

    The step increment adjustment of an employee who is on preventive suspension shall be


    withheld until such time that a decision on the case has been rendered.

    The trial court was correct in declaring that respondents had the right to be presumed innocent
    until proven guilty. This means that an employee who has a pending administrative case filed
    against him is given the benefit of the doubt and is considered innocent until the contrary is
    proven.

    ISSUE

    Do government employees under administrative investigation entitled to step increment?

    RULING

    The Court DECLAREs the assailed provisions on step increment in GSIS Board Resolution Nos.
    197 and 372 VOID.
    Social legislation like the circular on the grant of step increment, being remedial in character,
    should be liberally construed and administered in favor of the persons to be benefited. The
    liberal approach aims to achieve humanitarian purposes of the law in order that the efficiency,
    security and well-being of government employees may be enhanced.

    You might also like