SECOND DIVISION
[G.R. No. 241392. November 5, 2018.]
ESTEBAN M. BALTAZAR, JR., petitioner, vs.MERCY JANE B. PARAS-LEYNES, respondent.
NOTICE
Sirs/Mesdames :
Please take notice that the Court, Second Division, issued a Resolution dated05 November 2018which reads as follows:
"G.R. No. 241392 (Esteban M. Baltazar, Jr. v. Mercy Jane B. Paras-Leynes)
After a judicious study of the case, the Court resolves to DENY the instant petition 1 and AFFIRM the June 29, 2018 Decision 2 of the Court of Appeals (CA) in CA-G.R. SP No. 153601 for failure of petitioner Esteban M. Baltazar, Jr. (petitioner) to sufficiently show that the CA committed any reversible error in upholding the absolution of respondent Mercy Jane B. Paras-Leynes (respondent) from administrative liability.
As correctly ruled by the CA, respondent's additional designation as Officer-in-Charge of the Traffic Adjudication Service of the Land Transportation Office (LTO) did not prevent her from assuming the position of Chief Transportation Regulations Officer at the Intelligence Investigation Division, Law Enforcement Service, of the LTO. 3 In this regard, since the latter position amounts to a Division Chief position at the LTO, she is exempted from logging in and out at the finger scan machine 4 pursuant to LTO Office Order No. BGC-00-00231 5 dated August 15, 2000. It is settled that factual findings of the Office of the Ombudsman are conclusive when supported by substantial evidence and are accorded due respect and weight, especially when they are affirmed by the CA, 6 as in this case. ISHCcT
SO ORDERED." (REYES, J., JR., J., designated Additional Member per Special Order No. 2587 dated August 28, 2018; on official leave.)
Very truly yours,
(SGD.) MARIA LOURDES C. PERFECTODivision Clerk of CourtBy:TERESITA AQUINO TUAZONDeputy Division Clerk of Court
Footnotes
1.Rollo, pp. 10-20.
2.Id. at 24-32. Penned by Associate Justice Ramon R. Garcia with Associate Justices Myra V. Garcia-Fernandez and Germano Francisco D. Legaspi, concurring.
3. See id. at 30.
4. See id.
5. See id. at 30-31.
6.Ombudsman-Visayas v. Castro, 759 Phil. 68, 77 (2015).