FIRST DIVISION
[G.R. No. 234265. January 31, 2018.]
BUREAU OF INTERNAL REVENUE,petitioner,vs. NAHIDE DG. CARONONGAN, respondent.
NOTICE
Sirs/Mesdames :
Please take notice that the Court, First Division, issued a Resolution datedJanuary 31, 2018, which reads as follows:
"G.R. No. 234265 — BUREAU OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Petitioner, v. NAHIDE DG. CARONONGAN, Respondent. — The petitioner's motion for an extension of fifteen (15) days within which to file a petition for review on certiorari is GRANTED, counted from the expiration of the reglementary period.
The Court further resolves to DENY the petition for review on certiorari assailing the Decision dated April 10, 2017 and Resolution dated August 23, 2017 of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. SP No. 145275 for being procedurally infirm.
Firstly, the petition lacks proof of service on the Court of Appeals. Section 3 of Rule 45 requires, inter alia, that proof of service of a copy of the petition on the lower court concerned should be submitted to the Court together with the petition, to wit:
SEC. 3. Docket and other lawful fees; proof of service of petition. — Unless he has theretofore done so, the petitioner shall pay the corresponding docket and other lawful fees to the clerk of court of the Supreme Court x x x. Proof of service of a copy thereof on the lower court concerned and on the adverse party shall be submitted together with the petition. (Emphasis supplied.) CAIHTE
And, secondly, a perusal of the attachments of the petition reveals that certified true copies of the assailed Decision and Resolution of the Court of Appeals are the only documents appended to the petition. Note, however, that the above documents do not comply with the requirements laid down in Section 4 of Rule 45 that the petition shall be accompanied with "such material portions of the record as would support the petition." The rule reads:
SEC. 4. Contents of petition. — The petition shall be filed in eighteen (18) copies, with the original copy intended for the court being indicated as such by the petitioner, and shall x x x (d) be accompanied by a clearly legible duplicate original, or a certified true copy of the judgment or final order or resolution certified by the clerk of the court a quo and the requisite number of plain copies thereof, and such material portions of the record as would support the petition x x x. (Emphasis supplied.)
Considering that petitioner impugns the appellate court's affirmation of Decision No. 150835 promulgated on November 10, 2015 of the Civil Service Commission (CSC), and at the same time claims the validity of its RTAO No. 57-2014, the Court has no basis upon which it could actually and completely dispose of said matters. It behooved upon the petitioner to attach to the petition copies of the material portions of the record to substantiate the matters that it raised.
Failure to comply with the requirements set forth in the above-quoted Sections 3 and 4 of Rule 45 is a ground for the dismissal of the petition under Section 5 of the same rule, viz.:
SEC. 5. Dismissal or denial of petition. — The failure of the petitioner to comply with any of the foregoing requirements regarding the payment of the docket and other lawful fees, deposit for costs, proof of service of the petition, and the contents of and the documents which should accompany the petition shall be sufficient ground for the dismissal thereof. (Emphasis supplied.)
Thus, the present petition must be denied.
In any event, the petitioner failed to sufficiently show that the Court of Appeals committed any reversible error in the challenged decision and resolution.
The issues raised in the petition, particularly —
I.
THE HONORABLE COURT OF APPEALS ERRED IN RULING THAT CARONONGAN'[S] REASSIGNMENT RESULTED IN DIMINUTION OF RANK.
II.
THE HONORABLE COURT OF APPEALS ERRED IN RULING THAT CARONONGAN'[S] REASSIGNMENT RESULTED TO FINANCIAL DISLOCATION. 1
are questions of fact or factual in nature. It is settled that an appeal by petition for review on certiorari is limited to the review of errors of law committed by the Court of Appeals or another lower court. 2 Consequently, the Court cannot go over the evidence presented by the petitioner in the proceedings below and re-analyze, re-assess and re-weigh them to ascertain if the Court of Appeals correctly appreciated the evidence and the record. 3
To remind, factual findings of the CSC when affirmed by the Court of Appeals, are conclusive upon the Court, and are thus generally not reviewable. 4 Administrative agencies like the CSC possess the specialized knowledge and expertise in their respective fields. The Court may review and re-assess the evidence only when there is a clear showing by the petitioner that such findings of fact were either made with grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction, or were arrived at arbitrarily or in disregard of the evidence on record. 5 Here, there is none. HEITAD
SO ORDERED."
Very truly yours,
(SGD.) LIBRADA C. BUENADeputy Division Clerk of Court
Footnotes
1.Rollo, p. 26.
2. RULES OF COURT, Rule 45, Section 1.
3.Bacsasar v. Civil Service Commission, 596 Phil. 858, 867 (2009).
4.Donato, Jr. v. Civil Service Commission, Regional Office No. 1, 543 Phil. 731, 742 (2007).
5.Japson v. Civil Service Commission, 663 Phil. 665, 675 (2011).