Lex Rex Ph

CHR vs. Civil Service Commission


Atty Pacete opt for an optional retirement as Division Chief of CHR in 1989. The CHR and GSIS had conflicting decisions regarding the approval – CHR approved but GSIS won’t qualify him for retirement. Atty Pacete requested CHR to be reinstated, was denied, then elevated to MSPB. MSPB favored Pacete’s reinstatement and ordered payment of back wages and other benefits. Civil Service commission affirmed MSPB. CHR referred Pacete to the Ombudsman for criminal charges in relation to non-settlement of obligations.

Issues and Ruling

(1) Is Pacete entitled to backwages and other benefits?

(1) Yes. The issue here is whether or not he is entitled to optional retirement, and not his incompetence and inefficiency. The latter was only raised belatedly 

(2) Is CHR justified in refusing Pacete to continue rendering service?

No. CHR only raised the issue of incompetence and inefficiency as a ground for non-reinstatement of Pacete only after it allowed Pacete to undergo the process of optional retirement. If he is indeed guilty of incomeptence, he should have seasonable filed administrative charges against Pacete. The dismissal was also illegal for it lacked due notice and hearing.

Other Content You May Be Interested In:

Bautista vs. Salonga Digest

G.R. No. 86439, 13 April 1989 Facts In August 1987, President Cory, through a letter, designated Mary Bautista first as “Acting Chairman of CHR” then as permanent. She then took oath before

Read More »

Navarro vs. Domagtoy

129 SCRA 259 A judge who solemnized a bigamous marriage Facts Complainant Mayor Navarro files a complaint against respondent Municipal Circuit Trial Court Judge Hernando Domagtoy, which, he contends, exhibits gross misconduct

Read More »


Is the failure to assert a right or neglect to exercise due diligence for an unreasonable length of time. Also called “estoppel by laches” is the negligence or omission to assert a

Read More »

Trust Fund Doctrine

Trust Fund Doctrine considers the subscribed capital as a trust fund for the payment of debts of the corporation to which the creditors may look for satisfaction. (NTC vs. CA) How can

Read More »

Capital Gains Tax

Capital Gains Tax meaning is the final tax assessed on the presumed gain derived by citizens and resident aliens, as well as estates and trusts, from the sale of or exchange of

Read More »

Janice Marie Jao vs. CA (1987)

Topics: DNA Testing, Paternity Test Facts Petitioner, represented by her mother Arlene Salgado, filed a case for recognition and support against Perico V. Jao. Perico denied the paternity so they agreed to

Read More »