FIRST DIVISION
[G.R. No. 244324. June 17, 2019.]
VICENTE BALDRES BELGA, JR., petitioner, vs.EVEREST SECURITY AND INVESTIGATION AGENCY/MR. ADELBERT W. ANTONINO, respondents.
NOTICE
Sirs/Mesdames :
Please take notice that the Court, First Division, issued a Resolution datedJune 17, 2019which reads as follows:
"G.R. No. 244324 (Vicente Baldres Belga, Jr. v. Everest Security and Investigation Agency/Mr. Adelbert W. Antonino). — The petitioner's motion for an extension of thirty (30) days within which to file a petition for review on certiorari is GRANTED, counted from the expiration of the reglementary period.
After review, the Court resolves to DENY the petition for failure to sufficiently show that the Court of Appeals (CA) committed any reversible error in its ruling. HTcADC
At the outset, We note that petitioner raises questions of fact which are generally not reviewable in a petition for review on certiorari under Rule 45 of the Rules of Court. 1 Moreover, factual findings of quasi-judicial bodies, like the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC), are accorded with respect, even finality, if supported by substantial evidence. Particularly when passed upon and upheld by the CA, they are binding and conclusive upon this Court, and will not be disturbed absent circumstances which warrant application of the exceptions, as in this case. 2 At any rate, the CA correctly held that the NLRC committed no grave abuse of discretion in ruling that petitioner was not illegally dismissed and that he abandoned his employment with Everest Security and Investigation Agency. Respondents were able to present substantial evidence to prove that no illegal dismissal took place, unlike petitioner who failed to adduce evidence to buttress his claims. It is well-settled that mere allegation is not proof or evidence. 3
WHEREFORE, the petition is DENIED. The Decision dated May 31, 2018 and Resolution dated January 21, 2019 of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. SP No. 148215 are AFFIRMED.
The Court of Appeals is DELETED as party respondent in this case pursuant to Sec. 4, Rule 45, 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure, as amended. CAIHTE
SO ORDERED."
Very truly yours,
(SGD.) LIBRADA C. BUENADivision Clerk of Court
Footnotes
1.Powerhouse Staffbuilders International, Inc. v. Rey, G.R. No. 190203, November 7, 2016, 807 SCRA 8, 19-20.
2.Philippine Spring Water Resources, Inc. v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 205278, June 11, 2014, 726 SCRA 343, 359.
3.Expedition Construction Corporation v. Africa, G.R. No. 228671, December 14, 2017, 849 SCRA 327, 343.