Republic of the Philippines
OFFICE of the PRESIDENT
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
Cordillera Administrative Region
REGIONAL OFFICE
Wangal, La Trinidad, Benguet
LAYLA D. MAABA, as
representative of the minor
MICHAEL GABRIEL D.
MAABA,
Complainant,
INV. No. BENG-2017-006
- versus - For:
GROSS MISCONDUCT
DANIEL D. PEREDO, JULLA
D. GAIWEN and ALVIN C.
GUAKI,
Defendants.
x---------------------------------------
-x
COMMENT to the JOINT COUNTER-AFFIDAVIT
WITH UTMOST RESPECT to the HONORABLE OFFICE,
the Complainant, respectfully states that:
1) Complainant is a minor, Filipino citizen, with residential
address at AC 164 Poblacion, La Trinidad, Benguet, where he may
be served with summons and other processes. He is represented by
his mother, Layla D. Maaba, of legal age, Filipino citizen, and a
resident of the same address, where she may also be served
summons and other processes;
2) Defendants are all of legal ages, Filipino citizens, with office
address at the Cordillera Regional Science High School, Wangal,
La Trinidad, Benguet, where they be served summons and other
court processes. All of the defendants are currently employed in
the said institution;
3) Complainant was enrolled in the Cordillera Regional Science
High School as a ninth grade student for School Year 2016-2017,
wherein defendant Daniel D. Peredo (Peredo, for brevity) is
employed as principal;
1|Page
4) During the said school year, the complainant was under the
supervision of the defendant Julla D. Gaiwen (Gaiwen, for brevity)
as the complainant’s class adviser, as indicated in the complainant’s
report card, a copy of which is attached and marked hereto as
Annex “A”;
5) Likewise, the complainant had defendant Alvin C. Guaki
(Guaki, for brevity) as his Research Adviser for the same school
year;
6) In the morning of 18 May 2017, the complainant’s guardian,
Michael Jan Cruz, went to the aforementioned institution to enroll
the complainant for the tenth grade, bringing with him two (2)
books to submit on behalf of the complainant;
7) Much to Mr. Cruz’s dismay, he was informed that the
complainant was no longer allowed to enroll in the same institution
for the tenth grade, information which he quickly relayed to the
complainant’s mother, Ms. Layla D. Maaba;
8) Allegedly, the reason for denying the application for
enrollment of the complainant was based on the fact that he
garnered a grade of 75 in Research 9 for the fourth quarter, which
was a subject handled by defendant Guaki, as indicated in his report
card, bracketed and marked as Annex “A-1”;
9) The complainant insists that prior to 18 May 2017, he had no
knowledge nor inkling that he was going garner such a grade for his
Research 9 subject, considering that his attention was never called
by defendant Guaki and that he was able to submit all the
requirements for the said subject before the school year ended;
10) The complainant submitted the final requirement for
the subject prior to the due date; however, defendant Guaki
returned the same instructing the complainant to change the cover.
The complainant was able to submit the requirement with the
changed cover after the due date;
11) In fact, sometime in March 2017, the complainant,
together with his other classmates, first submitted the requirement
for the subject of defendant Guaki. A few hours thereafter,
defendant Guaki came back, called the names of the complainant
with his classmates and returned their respective projects by
throwing it at the floor for reasons currently unknown to the
complainant;
2|Page
12) Furthermore, the complainant maintains that, aside
from complying with the subject requirements, he was never remiss
in attending classes, unless without valid cause, and he was able to
maintain conduct and behavior above standard, as could be gleaned
in his report card hereto bracketed and marked as Annexes “A-2”
and “A-3”, respectively;
13) After discussing with the minor complainant, Ms.
Maaba, the complainant’s representative, went to the above-
described institution to express their concerns and discuss the
matter with the proper authorities;
14) Ms. Maaba was entertained by one Joan Palpeg. The
complainant’s mother expressed her disappointment in the
situation. She inquired as to the reason why she was not at least
given notice or warning that the complainant was at risk of failing;
15) Ms. Palpeg informed her that the notice would have
been given during card giving, however, the complainant was not
able to acquire his card during the scheduled card giving since he
lost two (2) books during the school year and he needed to replace
them prior to his card’s release;
16) A copy of the said Notice dated 07 March 2017 is
hereto attached as Annex “B”. It was only received by the
complainant’s representative last 18 May 2017, much to their
prejudice;
17) Ms. Palpeg informed the complainant’s representative
that they deliberate early as to the students to be removed from
their institution, which apparently includes herein complainant, a
fact which was not disclosed to his legal representative until 18
May 2017;
18) Pursuant to DepEd Order No. 8, Series of 2015, for
students in Grades 1-10, a learner who did not meet expectations in
at most two learning areas must take remedial classes.
Accordingly, teachers should ensure that learners receive
remediation when they earn raw scores which are consistently
below expectations in written work and performance tasks by the
fifth week of any quarter;
19) No such remediation was ever conducted for the
complainant by any of the defendants;
20) Such matters were raised by the complainant’s
representative before Ms. Palpeg, however, the latter stated that
3|Page
they do not give remedial classes in Research, which would be in
clear violation of the above-cited DepEd Order;
21) Eventually, the complainant’s representative was faced
by defendant Guaki, who, in turn, insisted that the complainant’s
previous grades should have prompted his representative to inquire
as to his status in relation to his Research subject;
22) For the record, the complainant’s grades for the said
subject never went below 80, until the grade given to him for the
fourth quarter;
23) Thereafter, the complainant’s representative went to
the DepEd Division Office to voice her concerns, but she was
advised to speak with the Principal first, herein defendant Peredo;
24) The complainant’s representative returned to the
above-described institution to consult with defendant Peredo the
issue involving the complainant;
25) Defendant Peredo immediately presented a letter dated
23 February 2017, duly signed by the complainant and his
representative, a copy of which is attached and marked hereto as
Annex “C”;
26) According to defendant Peredo, the said letter served
as a warning to parents of students who are potential candidates for
failing;
27) However, a perusal of the said letter would show that
at most it was a reminder for the requirements of students. It had
no clear indication that the recipients were in danger of failing the
said subject nor did it have any indication that it was merely for a
select number of students and parents;
28) On 22 May 2017, as a final attempt, the complainant’s
representative returned to the said institution to make a plea for the
cause of herein complainant;
29) She was seen by defendant Peredo and defendant
Guaki. The latter presented a portfolio for the complainant’s
performance in his subject, which showed that herein complainant
was given a grade of “40” for his final project;
30) Defendant Peredo, on the other hand, stated that he
could no longer do anything to aid the complainant at this point. In
fact, he even came to a point of blaming the complainant’s
4|Page
representative for having been so lax in checking the progress of
the complainant’s performance in school;
31) Again, no measure or attempt for remediation was
conducted by the defendants to the detriment and prejudice of the
complainant;
32) Considering that the complainant was only made
aware of his removal from the institution recently, he was no longer
able to seek enrollment in other institutions. Rather, the
complainant was constrained to settle for institutions that could still
accommodate him considering the time constraint.
PRAYER
WHEREFORE, premises considered, it is most respectfully
prayed of the Honorable Office, that after due notice and hearing, an order
and/or judgment be rendered finding the defendants guilty of GROSS
MISCONDUCT and ordering their REMOVAL from the institution of
the Cordillera Regional Science High School.
Other reliefs, just and equitable, are likewise prayed for.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my signature this 29 th
day of June 2017, in the City of Baguio, Philippines.
MICHAEL GABRIEL DECENA MAABA
Complainant
Herein assisted by:
LAYLA DECENA MAABA
Mother
UMID CRN-0111-1712238-8
5|Page
SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO before me this 29th day of June
2017, in the City of Baguio.
Doc. No. ;
Page No. ;
Book No. IX;
Series of 2017.
6|Page
REPUBLIC of the PHILIPPINES )
DONE in the CITY of BAGUIO ) S.S.
VERIFICATION and CERTIFICATION
I, MICHAEL GABRIEL DECENA MAABA, minor, Filipino
citizen, single, and a resident of AC 164 Poblacion, La Trinidad, Benguet,
Philippines, under oath, do hereby depose and state that:
I am the Complainant in the instant Complaint;
I have caused the preparation and filing of the foregoing
Complaint;
I have read and understood the factual material allegations
therein contained, and that the same are true and correct of my
own personal knowledge and based on authentic documents on
hand;
I further CERTIFY that I have not commenced any other
action or proceeding involving the same issues in the Supreme
Court, the Court of Appeals, or any other tribunal or agency;
To the best of my knowledge, no such action or proceeding is
pending in the Supreme Court, the Court of Appeals, or any other
tribunal or agency, and if I should thereafter learn that a similar
action or proceeding has been filed or is pending before the
Supreme Court, the Court of Appeals, or any other tribunal or
agency; I undertake to report that fact within five (5) days
therefrom to the court or agency wherein the original pleading and
sworn certification contemplated herein have been filed.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this 29th
day of June 2017 in the City of Baguio, Philippines.
MICHAEL GABRIEL DECENA MAABA
Affiant
With the assistance of:
LAYLA DECENA MAABA
Mother
UMID CRN-0111-1712238-8
7|Page
SUBSCRIBED and SWORN to BEFORE ME this 29th day of
June 2017 in the City of Baguio, Philippines. The affiant who
acknowledged to me that the foregoing Complaint is his voluntary act and
deed. He was assisted by his mother who exhibited her government
issued ID, the details of which are indicated below her name as her
competent proof of identity.
Doc. No. ;
Page No. ;
Book No. ;
Series of 2017.
8|Page
