NPC V. ZOZOBRADO G. R. No. 153022 April 10, 2006
FACTS:
Agustin A. Zozobrado, herein respondent, is a permanent employee of petitioner National Power Corporation (NPC) assigned as Pilot in the aviation group, received a letter from NPC President Frederico C. Puno, informing him that he was being dropped from the rolls.
Zozobrado filed an appeal before the CSC questioning NPCs implementation of dropping him from the rolls.
CSC dismissed Zobrado’s appeal and MR.
Respondent filed with the Court of Appeals a Petition for Review on Certiorari under Rule 43 of the Rules of Court and was granted.
Petitioner filed for MR but was denied.
Respondent had been dropped by petitioner from the rolls due to Unsatisfactory or Poor Performance.
CA ruled in favor of herein respondents finding that the separation was made with utter lack of due process.
ISSUE:
WON due process was followed in dropping respondent from the rolls.
HELD:
NO. Both the substantive and procedural aspect of due process were violated by petitioner in dismissing respondent.
As to the procedural aspect, not even one requisites laid down by Memorandum Circular No. 12 has been complied with. Respondent was never notified in writing of his Unsatisfactory rating within 30 days from the end of the semester when the Unsatisfactory rating was given.
Respondent was never warned in writing that a succeeding Unsatisfactory performance shall warrant his separation from the service. Even the allegation of the oral notice itself (that petitioner claims and respondent categorically denies) is clearly an afterthought, having been utilized for the first time in the Motion for Reconsideration of the assailed Court of Appeals decision and was never used as an argument in the administrative proceedings. The proof of such notice, a self-serving affidavit of the very individual who unilaterally gave the apparently groundless rating, deserves scant consideration.
As to the substantive aspect, evidence shows that petitioner never denied that respondents unsatisfactory rating was due to respondents testimony in court concerning the graft charges against NPC employees. On the day respondent was supposed to testify in court under pain of contempt, Gen. Lagera suddenly sent him to fly the NPC President despite the fact that another pilot was assigned to such mission.
Moreover, Gen. Lagera’s ill motive is further proved by the fact that respondent was kept in the dark as to the status of his employment even though the same had already been terminated two months earlier. It appears that the sad news was relayed to respondent only on his natal day affair. We can see no reason for the two months delay other than the devastation Gen. Lagera expected to cause by imparting the shocking news on respondents birth anniversary, during a celebration and in front of other people.
As further found by the Court of Appeals, when respondent brought to the Grievance Committee the matter of his unsatisfactory ratings, the Grievance Committee recommended a review thereof to take into account respondents quantity of flying hours. Pilots have traditionally been rated by the number of flying hours spent in their career, and respondent had more than double the flying hours of the two other pilots of the Aviation Group combined. However, Gen. Lagera blocked such review, claiming that he had already considered the same, albeit minimally. This is a clear indication that Gen. Lagera really wanted to take it upon himself to solely give the Unsatisfactory ratings to respondent, in violation of the approved Performance Appraisal System (PAS) of the NPC.