Tapucar v. City Government of General Santos
This is a civil case decided by the Supreme Court of the Philippines on April 1, 2019, in G.R. No. 244041. The case concerns petitioners who contend that their availment of retirement benefits from the Government Service Insurance System (GSIS) was a necessary consequence of City Ordinance No. 08. However, the Court of Appeals correctly ruled that nowhere in the said City Ordinance did it state that those who would avail of it should also file an application for separation benefits before the GSIS. The Supreme Court affirmed the assailed Decision and Resolution of the Court of Appeals, denying the petition for lack of proof of service on the Court of Appeals and failure to show any reversible error on the part of the CA.
ADVERTISEMENT
FIRST DIVISION
[G.R. No. 244041. April 1, 2019.]
LUCINA R. TAPUCAR, ELPIDIO V. PERRERAS, REMEDIOS G. KARUNUNGAN, JOSEFINA G. HERNANDO, URSULA B. ESMA, ET AL., IN THEIR OWN BEHALF AND AS ATTORNEYS-IN-FACT OF AMPARO F. CANZANA, ET AL., petitioners, vs.CITY GOVERNMENT OF GENERAL SANTOS, HEREIN REPRESENTED BY ITS CITY MAYOR, RONNEL C. RIVERA, respondent.
NOTICE
Sirs/Mesdames :
Please take notice that the Court, First Division, issued a Resolution dated April 1, 2019 which reads as follows:
"G.R. No. 244041 — Lucina R. Tapucar, Elpidio V. Perreras, Remedios G. Karunungan, Josefina G. Hernando, Ursula B. Esma, et al., in their own behalf and as Attorneys-in-Fact of Amparo F. Canzana, et al., Petitioners, vs. City Government of General Santos, herein represented by its City Mayor, Ronnel C. Rivera, Respondent.
After a judicious review of petitioners' allegations and in accordance with Rule 45 and other related provisions of the Rules of Court, the Court resolves to DENY the present Petition for Review on Certiorari for: (1) lack of proof of service on the Court of Appeals (CA); and (2) failure to show any reversible error on the part of the CA in rendering the assailed Decision 1 and Resolution dated December 7, 2017 and November 28, 2018, respectively, in CA-G.R. SP No. 06527 MIN.
Petitioners insist that their availment of the retirement benefits from the Government Service Insurance System (GSIS) was part of the procedure and a necessary consequence of City Ordinance No. 08.
However, as correctly ruled by the CA, nowhere in the said City Ordinance did it state that those who would avail of it should also file an application for separation benefits before the GSIS. The retirement benefits under the City Ordinance were totally different and independent from the retirement incentives given by the GSIS. The City Ordinance did not explicitly require the submission of an application for retirement with the GSIS before employees could avail of or enjoy its incentives.
ACCORDINGLY, the Court resolves to AFFIRM the assailed Decision and Resolution dated December 7, 2017 and November 28, 2018, respectively, of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. SP No. 06527 MIN.
SO ORDERED." Jardeleza, J., on official leave.
Very truly yours,
(SGD.) LIBRADA C. BUENADivision Clerk of Court
Footnotes
1. Penned by Associate Justice Edgardo A. Camello and concurred in by Associate Justices Ronaldo B. Martin and Tita Marilyn B. Payoyo-Villordon.
RECOMMENDED FOR YOU