Gentlemen:

Quoted hereunder, for your information, is a resolution of this Court dated SEP 2 2003.

A.M. No. P-94-1080 (Dinah Cristina A. Amane vs. Atty. Susan M. Arce.)

It may be recalled that in the instant case, complaint Dinah Cristina A. Amane, then Clerk III of the Regional Trial Court, Branch 19, Roxas City, charged Atty. Susan M. Arce, then Clerk of Court of the Same Court, with conduct prejudicial to the best interest of the service, disgraceful conduct and oppression.

As a countercharge, respondent imputed notorious absenteeism and falsification of Daily Time Records (DTRs) against complainant.

In our Decision in this case dated November 19, 1999, we found respondent Arce guilty of grave misconduct, oppression and conduct prejudicial to the best interest of the service and dismissed her from the service with the forfeiture of all benefits and privileges, with prejudice to reemployment in the government including government-owned and controlled corporation. However, acting upon her motion for reconsideration, we modified the penalty imposed upon her by granting her accrued leave credits.[1]

In the same Decision, we found complainant guilty of notorious absenteeism and falsification of her DTRs and likewise dismissed her from the service with forfeiture of all benefits and privileges, with prejudice to reemployment in the government including government-owned and controlled corporation.

Complaint now files the present manifestation and Motion, pleading for compassion and understanding and praying that we reconsider our Decision by granting her accrued leave credits.

Section 58, Rule IV of the Revised Uniform Rules in Administrative Cases in the Civil Service[2] provides:

“Sec. 58. The penalty of dismissal shall carry with it that of cancellation of eligibility, forfeiture of retirement benefits, and the perpetual disqualification for reemployment in the government service, unless otherwise provided in the decision.”

It is clear from the above provision that where the penalty imposed is dismissal from the service, only respondent’s retirement benefits shall be forfeited, the accrued leave credits are not included. We previously applied this rule in this case when, upon a similar motion of respondent Arce, we granted her accrued leave credits. We see no justification why we cannot extend to complainant the same benefit.

WHEREFORE, the instant motion is GRANTED. Our Decision dated November 19, 1999 is partly reconsidered in the sense that complainant Dinah Cristina A. Amane is hereby given her accrued leave credits.

SO ORDERED.

Davide, Jr., C.J., Ynares-Santiago and Carpio, JJ., on official business.

Very truly yours,

LUZVIMINDA D. PUNO

Clerk of Court

By:

(Sgd.) MA. LUISA D. VILLARAMA

Assistant Clerk of Court

[2] CSC Memorandum Circular No. 19, Series of 1999.