FIRST DIVISION
[G.R. No. L-13046. May 20, 1960. ]
EGMIDIO T. PASCUA, petitioner and appellant, v. HON. PEDRO TUASON, ETC., respondent and Appellant.
Diokno & Sison for Appellant.
Assistant Solicitor General Esmeraldo Umali and Solicitor Camilo D. Quiason for the Secretary of Justice.
SYLLABUS
PUBLIC OFFICERS; SUSPENSION DUE TO CRIMINAL CASE FILED AGAINST EMPLOYEE; NEW CHARGES FILED BEFORE ACQUITTAL. — Where an employee has been suspended because of the criminal case filed against him and thereafter has been acquitted, but prior to said acquittal, new charges have been filed against said employee for which he could be suspended anew, the department head may continue the suspension previously decreed without first reinstating the employee to his former position.
D E C I S I O N
BENGZON, J.:
Both parties to this case have appealed from the decision of the Manila court of first instance, in a mandamus proceeding, ordering petitioner’s reinstatement to his former Government position 1 with back salaries, unless he has been suspended or should be suspended by the respondent Secretary of Justice by virtue of the charges newly filed against him.
Such decision was rendered upon a stipulation of facts, the pertinent portions of which read as follows:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph
"2. On December 1, 1937, petitioner was appointed to the Division of Investigation (now National Bureau of Investigation) of the Department of Justice and rendered active service since that date, so much so that on January 6, 1949, he was appointed District-Agent-at-large at a salary of P4,800.00 per annum;
4. Sometime on May 14, 1951, in connection with (his) assignment in the PRISCO office at Cebu City, Petitioner. . . was accused in Criminal Case No. V-2971 of the Court of First Instance of Cebu, of the crime of falsification of public documents, and on May 18, 1957, the then Secretary of Justice issued the following order of suspension against petitioner:chanrob1es virtual 1aw library
‘In view of the information filed against you, and upon the recommendation of the Assistant Director of the National Bureau of Investigation, you are hereby suspended from office, effective upon receipt hereof, and pending the termination of the case filed against you.’
5. While under such suspension, another criminal case No. V-2999 of the Court of First Instance of Cebu was filed against petitioner jointly with Isidro Kintanar and several others, for "grave coercion" ;
6. In both cases, petitioner was convicted by the Court of First Instance of Cebu but in both cases also, he was acquitted by the Court of Appeals; the acquittal in the Criminal Case for falsification of public documents became final on April 8, 1953, and his acquittal in the criminal case for grave coercion on October 8, 1954;
7. In view of these acquittals, on October 18, 1954, petitioner requested the respondent to reinstate him and to order the payment of his back salaries, but respondent has refused and still refuses to do so for the following reasons. On September 6, 1954, before his acquittal of the charge of grave coercion by the Court of Appeals, petitioner was charged administratively with acts unbecoming of a district agent, because during his suspension from office mentioned in the preceding paragraph 4 hereof, he managed a corporation called the Central Information and Advisory Service, Inc., which is engaged in gathering information of all kinds and supplying the same to interested parties for a fee or price. Again, on October 15, 1955, the Director of the National Bureau of Investigation filed other administrative charges against the petitioner for oppression, dishonesty and negligence based upon the facts subject of the criminal cases referred to in the preceding paragraphs 4 and 5 hereof. All said administrative charges are still being heard."cralaw virtua1aw library
The judge opined that after his acquittal in the criminal cases for falsification and coercion, the suspended officer became entitled to reinstatement; but as there were other charges for which he might have been or could be suspended, said judge added as a precautionary measure, the proviso about eventual suspension by the Department Head.
Against this condition or proviso the petitioner took this appeal, contending it might imply respondent’s power to suspend him now — i.e. keep him out — by virtue of the new charges, without first reinstating him and paying him his back salaries. We think it does imply such power; and the question remains whether the judgment, for that reason, becomes legally objectionable. In view of the administrative charges, the Secretary had the prerogative of suspension, or, more correctly, of continuing the suspension previously decreed. Having failed to perceive the second alternative, and concluding that the suspension on account of the criminal charges should be ended, the court required his reinstatement, with the saving clause, however, that would avoid encroachment upon the Department’s power to take action on account of the two administrative charges, the seriousness of which may be here outlined. According to the first, about gathering information, Pascua imparted confidential matters in the files of the Bureau to private parties, for a price 2; and the second contains the following:chanrob1es virtual 1aw library
I. OPPRESSION
"In that Atty. Pascua together with his armed companions, on 9 March 1951, at the Lahug Airport Ceb
Such decision was rendered upon a stipulation of facts, the pertinent portions of which read as follows:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph
"2. On December 1, 1937, petitioner was appointed to the Division of Investigation (now National Bureau of Investigation) of the Department of Justice and rendered active service since that date, so much so that on January 6, 1949, he was appointed District-Agent-at-large at a salary of P4,800.00 per annum;
x x x
4. Sometime on May 14, 1951, in connection with (his) assignment in the PRISCO office at Cebu City, Petitioner. . . was accused in Criminal Case No. V-2971 of the Court of First Instance of Cebu, of the crime of falsification of public documents, and on May 18, 1957, the then Secretary of Justice issued the following order of suspension against petitioner:chanrob1es virtual 1aw library
‘In view of the information filed against you, and upon the recommendation of the Assistant Director of the National Bureau of Investigation, you are hereby suspended from office, effective upon receipt hereof, and pending the termination of the case filed against you.’
5. While under such suspension, another criminal case No. V-2999 of the Court of First Instance of Cebu was filed against petitioner jointly with Isidro Kintanar and several others, for "grave coercion" ;
6. In both cases, petitioner was convicted by the Court of First Instance of Cebu but in both cases also, he was acquitted by the Court of Appeals; the acquittal in the Criminal Case for falsification of public documents became final on April 8, 1953, and his acquittal in the criminal case for grave coercion on October 8, 1954;
7. In view of these acquittals, on October 18, 1954, petitioner requested the respondent to reinstate him and to order the payment of his back salaries, but respondent has refused and still refuses to do so for the following reasons. On September 6, 1954, before his acquittal of the charge of grave coercion by the Court of Appeals, petitioner was charged administratively with acts unbecoming of a district agent, because during his suspension from office mentioned in the preceding paragraph 4 hereof, he managed a corporation called the Central Information and Advisory Service, Inc., which is engaged in gathering information of all kinds and supplying the same to interested parties for a fee or price. Again, on October 15, 1955, the Director of the National Bureau of Investigation filed other administrative charges against the petitioner for oppression, dishonesty and negligence based upon the facts subject of the criminal cases referred to in the preceding paragraphs 4 and 5 hereof. All said administrative charges are still being heard."cralaw virtua1aw library
The judge opined that after his acquittal in the criminal cases for falsification and coercion, the suspended officer became entitled to reinstatement; but as there were other charges for which he might have been or could be suspended, said judge added as a precautionary measure, the proviso about eventual suspension by the Department Head.
Against this condition or proviso the petitioner took this appeal, contending it might imply respondent’s power to suspend him now — i.e. keep him out — by virtue of the new charges, without first reinstating him and paying him his back salaries. We think it does imply such power; and the question remains whether the judgment, for that reason, becomes legally objectionable. In view of the administrative charges, the Secretary had the prerogative of suspension, or, more correctly, of continuing the suspension previously decreed. Having failed to perceive the second alternative, and concluding that the suspension on account of the criminal charges should be ended, the court required his reinstatement, with the saving clause, however, that would avoid encroachment upon the Department’s power to take action on account of the two administrative charges, the seriousness of which may be here outlined. According to the first, about gathering information, Pascua imparted confidential matters in the files of the Bureau to private parties, for a price 2; and the second contains the following:chanrob1es virtual 1aw library
I. OPPRESSION
"In that Atty. Pascua together with his armed companions, on 9 March 1951, at the Lahug Airport Ceb
