(Part 15) EN BANC | HERNANDO, J. | LUMAUAN vs. COA

 

[ G.R. No. 218304, December 09, 2020 ]

NINIA P. LUMAUAN, PETITIONER, VS. COMMISSION ON AUDIT, RESPONDENT.

👨‍⚖️ HERNANDO, J. 

In Torcuator v. Commission on Audit, a case involving the same issue, the Court upheld the disallowance of the payment of Cost of Living Allowance (COLA) because said allowance was deemed already integrated in the compensation of government employees under Section 12 of RA 6758. The Court further declared that said provision was self-executing, and thus the absence of any DBM issuance was immaterial.

It is a cardinal rule in statutory construction that statutory provisions control the rules and regulations which may be issued pursuant thereto. Such rules and regulations must be consistent with and must not defeat the purpose of the statute. The validity of R.A. No. 6758 should not be made to depend on the validity of its implementing rules. x x x 

Verily, the Court has consistently held that Sec. 12 of R.A. No. 6758 is valid and self-executory even without the implementing rules of DBM-CCC No. 10. The said provision clearly states that all allowances and benefits received by government officials and employees are deemed integrated in their salaries. 

As applied in this case, the COLA, medical, food gift, and rice allowances are deemed integrated in the salaries of the PWD officers and employees. Petitioners could not cite any specific implementing rule, stating that these are non-integrated allowances. Thus, the general rule of integration shall apply.(Citations omitted.) 

Petitioner's reliance on the pronouncement of the Court in Philippine Ports Authority (PPA) Employees Hired After July 1, 1989 v. Commission on Audit, reiterated in Metropolitan Waterworks and Sewerage System v. Bautista, that employees of GOCC, whether incumbent or not, are entitled to COLA from 1989 to 1999, is misplaced. 

The Court in Maritime Industry Authority (MIA) v. Commission on Audit already clarified that the ruling in Philippine Ports Authority (PPA) Employees Hired After July 1, 1989 v. Commission on Audit only distinguished the benefits that may be received by government employees hired before and after the effectivity of RA 6758. 

In fact, in Republic v. Judge Cortez, the Court made it clear that Philippine Ports Authority (PPA) Employees Hired After July 1, 1989 v. Commission on Audit "only applies if the compensation package of those hired before the effectivity of Republic Act No. 6758 actually decreased; or in case of those hired after, if they received a lesser compensation package as a result of the deduction of COLA." Such is not the situation in the instant case. 

In view of the foregoing, the Court finds no grave abuse of discretion on the part of respondent COA-CP in disallowing the payment of accrued COLA for CYs 1992 to 1997 in the aggregate amount of P1,689,750.00. 

Read full decision at: https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2020/dec2020/gr_218304_2020.html 

Read case digest @ https://lawyerly.ph/digest/c1051a?user=15072