ABELLA V. CA G.R. No. 110379, 28 November 1997, 282 SCRA 256.
FACTS:
On September 17, 1990, DECS Secretary Cario issued a return-to-work order to all public school teachers who had participated in walk-outs and strikes on various dates during the period of September to October 1990. The mass action had been staged to demand payment of 13th month pay, allowances and passage of debt cap bill in Congress. On October 1990, Secretary Carino filed administrative cases against respondents, who are teachers of Mandaluyong High School. The charge sheets required respondents to explain in writing why they should not be punished for having taken part in the mass action in violation of civil service laws. At the same time, Secretary Cario ordered petitioner-appellee to be placed under preventive suspension.
Administrative hearings started on December 1990.
Respondents, through counsel assailed the legality of the proceedings on the following due process grounds:
l first, they were not given copies of the guidelines adopted by the committee for the investigation and denied access to evidence;
l second, the investigation placed the burden of proof on respondents to prove their innocence;
l third, that the investigating body was illegally constituted, their composition and appointment violated Sec.9 of the Magna Carta for Public School Teachers.
Pending the action assailing the validity of the administrative proceedings, the investigating committee rendered a decision finding the respondents guilty and ordered their immediate dismissal.
ISSUE:
WON the teachers were dismissed without due process of law.
HELD:
YES. In administrative proceedings, due process has been recognized to include the following:
(1) the right to actual or constructive notice of the institution of proceedings which may affect a respondents legal rights;
(2) a real opportunity to be heard personally or with the assistance of counsel, to present witnesses and evidence in one's favor, and to defend one's rights;
(3) a tribunal vested with competent jurisdiction and so constituted as to afford a person charged administratively a reasonable guarantee of honesty as well as impartiality; and
(4) a finding by the said tribunal which is supported by substantial evidence submitted for consideration during the hearing or contained in the records or made known to the parties affected.
The legislature enacted a special law, RA 4670 known as the Magna Carta for Public School Teachers, which specifically covers administrative proceedings involving public schoolteachers. Section 9 of said law expressly provides that the committee to hear public schoolteachers administrative cases should be composed of the school superintendent of the division as chairman, a representative of the local or any existing provincial or national teachers organization and a supervisor of the division.
Sec. 9. Administrative Charges. - Administrative charges against a teacher shall be heard initially by a committee composed of the corresponding School Superintendent of the Division or a duly authorized representative who would at least have the rank of a division supervisor, where the teacher belongs, as chairman, a representative of the local or, in its absence, any existing provincial or national teachers organization and a supervisor of the Division, the last two to be designated by the Director of Public Schools. The committee shall submit its findings, and recommendations to the Director of Public Schools within thirty days from the termination of the hearings: Provided, however, that where the school superintendent is the complainant or an interested party, all the members of the committee shall be appointed by the Secretary of Education.
Indeed, in the case at bar, neither the DECS Secretary nor the DECS-NCR regional director personally conducted the investigation but entrusted it to a committee composed of a division supervisor, secondary and elementary school teachers, and consultants. But there was no representative of a teachers organization. This is a serious flaw in the composition of the committee because the provision for the representation of a teachers organization is intended by law for the protection of the rights of teachers facing administrative charges.