Scribd
Upload
216 views1 page

Abalos v. CSC (Case Digest)

This case involves two employees, Villabona and Yap, who were dismissed from their jobs after retracting statements they made in an affidavit accusing their predecessor of misusing government equipment. The Civil Service Commission ruled their dismissal was illegal and reinstated them. The petitioner claims the CSC decision was an abuse of discretion. However, the court ruled that immediately dismissing the employees without a chance to defend themselves violated their due process rights. The court had previously found the legal provision allowing for immediate dismissal to be unconstitutional.

Uploaded by

Queenie Boado
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as RTF, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
216 views1 page

Abalos v. CSC (Case Digest)

This case involves two employees, Villabona and Yap, who were dismissed from their jobs after retracting statements they made in an affidavit accusing their predecessor of misusing government equipment. The Civil Service Commission ruled their dismissal was illegal and reinstated them. The petitioner claims the CSC decision was an abuse of discretion. However, the court ruled that immediately dismissing the employees without a chance to defend themselves violated their due process rights. The court had previously found the legal provision allowing for immediate dismissal to be unconstitutional.

Uploaded by

Queenie Boado
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as RTF, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 1

Abalos v.

CSC

Facts:

The Civil Service Commission in its resolution declared Villabona and Yap as reinstated to
their work in the Provincial Engineers Office as they had been illegally dismissed. Petitioner
Abalos contends that the decision was issued with grave abuse of discretion. A Tanodbayan
complaint for malversation was filed against his predecessor Quibranza due to his using of
bulldozers belonging to the province for personal purposes. Villabona and Yap were the
witnesses, executing affidavits to support such accusations.

Villabona and Yap, retracted their statements, claiming that it was spurious. Memoranda
were then issued by the Petitioner to Villabona and Yap telling them to explain their innocence
and retracting their statements, causing humiliation to the Office of the Provincial Government.
The respondents Villabona and Yap were then suspended from work and then soon dismissed
from their service. A resolution was then maintained declaring their dismissal illegal and was
sustained by the Civil Service Commission.

Petitioners invoke Section 40 P.D No. 807 regarding Summary Proceedings, which listed
that when the charge is serious and the evidence of guilt is strong, respondents may be
immediately removed or dismissed. Being that respondents admitted their own guilt and the
evidence against them is strong, dismissal was immediate.

Issue:

Whether or not the immediate dismissal of respondents is valid;

Ruling:

The Court has previously ruled on the constitutionality of Section 40, it being violative of
the right to due process by the defendants, as dismissing them immediately without them being
able to defend themselves.

The question on Section 40 has been rendered moot and academic by this Court, and
has been removed from statute books. The repeal of Section 40 will further bolster the
independence and intergrity of the Civil Service and protect its members from the arbitrary
excercise of authority by officials with less than the proper respect for due process of law.

You might also like