ChanRobles Virtual law Library
PHILIPPINE LAWS, STATUTES & CODES
A collection of Philippine laws, statutes and codes not included or cited in the main indices of the Chan Robles Virtual Law Library.
:
ADMINISTRATIVE ORDERS
PLEASE CLICK HERE FOR THE LATEST ➔ PHILIPPINE LAWS, STATUTES & CODES
ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER NO. 251 -
IMPOSING THE PENALTY OF DISMISSAL FROM OFFICE WITH FORFEITURE OF
RETIREMENT AND OTHER BENEFITS ON DR. AMIRBAHAL H. ALUK, CITY
SUPERINTENDENT OF SCHOOLS, PAGADIAN CITY
This refers to the administrative case
against Dr. Amirbahal H. Aluk, City Superintendent of Schools, Pagadian
City, for alleged grave misconduct, conduct pre-judicial to the best
interest of the service and gross violation of the Civil Service Law
(P.D. 807), Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act (RA 3019) and the Code
of Conduct and Ethical Standard for Public officials and Employees (RA
6713).
Records show that the case stemmed from Resolution No. 104, dated April
15, 1988, of the Sangguniang Panlungsod of Pagadian City, after a
fact-finding investigation, informing the Secretary of Education,
Culture and Sports of certain anomalous activities committed by
respondent, Dr. Amirbahal H. Aluk, consisting of receiving sums of
money from teacher-applicants in consideration for their appointments
or promotions to positions in public schools in Pagadian City. It
further requested the Secretary to conduct an impartial fact-finding
investigation thereof.
Acting thereon, a fact-finding committee was constituted to conduct a
discreet inquiry on the matters alleged in the aforesaid resolution. In
its report of July 25,1991, the fact-finding committee found that a
prima facie case exists and recommended the filing of appropriate
charges against respondent.
On the basis thereof, together with the sworn statements of the
teachers and the minutes of the fact-finding session of the Sangguniang
Panlungsod of Pagadian City dated April 4 and 6, 1988, the Secretary of
Education, Culture and Sports motu proprio filed, on August 6, 1991,
formal charges against respondent for grave misconduct, conduct
prejudicial to the best interest of the service and gross violation of
the Civil Service Ltw (PD 807), Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act
(RA 3019) and the Code of Conduct and Ethical Standard for Public
Officials and Employees (RA 6713), committed as follows:
"That
sometime in May, 1990 you received the amount of fifteen thousand pesos
(P15,000.00) from Marian Alviar at your residence at Kawit, Pagadian
City in consideration of her appointment as substitute teacher at
Macasing Elementary School, Macasing, Pagadian City and her
reappointment in January 1991;
"That sometime in September,
1990 you received the amount of fifteen thousand pesos (P15,000.00)
from Miss Charissa C. Alcasid at your residence in Kawit, Pagadian City
in consideration of her appointment as a school teacher at Macasing
Elementary School.
'That you received from Edwin
Magatao the total amount of P9,000.00 and two goats costing P500.00 and
requiring him to work in the construction of the extension of your
house in consideration of his appointment.
"That you received the amount of
P3,000.00 from Mr. Marciano Mong; P4,000.00 from Mr. Roque Alicorte;
P5,000.00 from Mrs. Zenaida Alaestante; P5,000.00 from Mrs. Carmelita
Dublin; P5,000.00 from Mrs. Rallos and P5,000.00 from Mrs. Virginia
Briones in consideration of their appointments.
"That most of the applicants
were not extended appointments but were only given order of assignments
and therefore failed to receive the salary due them."
"That you appointed Angela
Mariño, rank No. 14; Rhodora Roda, rank 44; Maria Cherrylyn
Teves, rank 26 and Abella Tamayo, rank 133 ahead of Merlinda W. Gallos
who was then rank No. 6."
In his "Answer with Motion to Dismiss", dated August 28, 1991, respondent parries the charges against him by resolute denials. He claims that the charges proferred are false, and initiated by people with ulterior motives.
The evidence for the complainant presented at the formal hearing are stated in the letter-report, dated September 18, 1991, of the Special Investigators, thus:
"1.
"2.
"3.
"4.
"5.
"5.
On the otherhand, the evidence for the respondent is briefly cited in the same report in the following manner:
"Respondent
presented Ludy Detalla, Evelyn Callos, Rhodora Roda, Cadiguia Datukali,
Rodrigo Ramirez, Armamen Fontanilla, Tita Martin, Evelyn Laurete,
Hermogena P. Berdan, Oscar Dolonn, Judith Rivera, Monelto M. Benitez
and Cherrylyn Teves, Welton Dequelito, Laura Zanogao (Exh. I-II
inclusive) with a common allegation that respondent Aluk did not
received any amount from them in exchange of their appointment nor from
6 other teacher-applicants and that they know Mr. Aluk as an honest and
religious man. Mr. Welton Dequelito belied the claim that teachers were
not paid for their services and renovation of his house.
"In his affidavit Exh. '12',
Respondent Aluk denied the allegations of the teacher-complainants. On
cross examination however, he admits that he does not know of any
motive on the part on the teacher-complainants in filing a case against
him."
After due hearing, the Special Investigators found respondent guilty of grave misconduct for asking and receiving money in consideration of the teachers' appointments and taking undue advantage of his position by requiring teachers under him to work in his house without compensation, and recommended his dismissal (with qualification) from the service in this wise:
"VII.
"1.
"2.
"VIII.
"After
a very careful evaluation of the evidence presented by both parties,
the undersigned finds Mr. Aluk guilty of Grave Misconduct (asking and
receiving money in consideration of teachers' appointment) and taking
advantage of his position by requiring the teachers under him to work
in his house without compensation.
"Mr. Aluk is about to retire
under compulsory retirement having been born in 1927. For which, he is
entitled to a mitigating circumstances of length of service which is
offset by the aggravating circumstances of taking advantage of official
position, taking undue advantage of subordinate and habituality.
"Memorandum Circular 30 s. of
1989 classifies the offense as Grave Misconduct punishable by dismissal
from the service even as a first offense. In accordance thereto, the
undersigned respectfully recommend the dismissal of Supt. Aluk from the
service. However, should the Honorable Secretary feels that for
humanitarian reasons, a lower penalty should be imposed, Supt. Aluk may
be given a penalty short of dismissal which does not carry accessory
penalty of forfeiture of retirement benefits and accrued leave of
credit like suspension in Office until his compulsory retirement, but
respondent Aluk should at least return the amount received by him from
the teacher-complainants. Mr. Aluk claims to have been born on October
21, 1927, noted by the Civil Service Commission when he requested for
correction of his date of birth from October 21, 1926 to October 21,
1927."
In his 1st Indorsement of September 20, 1991, the Secretary of Education, Culture and Sports concurred in the findings of the Special Investigators, and recommended that respondent be dismissed from the service with prejudice to retirement benefits.
I am in full accord with the findings of the Special Investigators, as subsequently concurred in by the Secretary of Education, Culture and Sports. The evidence presented by complainants, which are preponderant and convincing, have sufficiently established the guilt of respondent.
Respondent's main defense is mere denial. His denial cannot, however, prevail over the clear and positive testimonies of the complainants (People vs. Pasco, Jr., L-45715, June 24, 1985, 137 SCRA 137). Such denial constitutes self-serving evidence, which should not be afforded any evidentiary weight greater than the declarations of credible witnesses who testify on affirmative matters (People v. Abonada, No. 50041, January 27, 1989, 169 SCRA 530). I am convinced that the statements given by the complainants deserve full faith and credit, it appearing that there is no evidence of any improper motive in their part to falsely testify against respondent.
As regards the common declaration of respondent's witnesses that they have not paid respondent sums of money in consideration of their appointments, the same are irrelevant, since their statements will not prove respondent's innocence because none of them has actual knowledge of the incidents complained of. At best, their testimonies are mere conjectures and surmises, which are not strong enough to exculpate respondent from liability.
The alleged exemplary conduct and good moral character of respondent is not also sufficient reason to acquit the latter, especially so in light of the overwhelming evidence sustaining the findings of his guilt.
WHEREFORE, premises considered, Dr. Amirbahal H. Aluk, City Superintendent of Schools, Pagadian City, is hereby found GUILTY of grave misconduct and, accordingly, DISMISSED from service with forfeiture of retirement and other benefits upon service hereof.
DONE in the City of Manila, this 21st day of November in the year of Our Lord, nineteen hundred and ninety-one.
chanrobles virtual law library
Back to Main
Since 19.07.98.