COMMISSION ON AUDIT, ETC. VERSUS THE CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION, ET. AL.

Commission on Audit versus Civil Service Commission

The Case

This is a petition for review filed by the Commission on Audit against the Civil Service Commission and other respondents, brought before the Court of Appeals and later elevated to the Supreme Court. The case matters to a reviewee not for any grand doctrinal pronouncement on audit or civil service law, but because it illustrates the strict and unforgiving application of the procedural rules on the timeliness of an appeal and on the completeness of the record. It is a study in how a meritorious cause may be lost, not on the merits, but on the failure to perfect an appeal within the period fixed by the rules and to attach the required supporting documents.

Procedural History

The case originated from a decision and a resolution of the Civil Service Commission, both of which were the subject of a challenge brought before the Court of Appeals. The Court of Appeals rendered a decision dated the sixth of August, 2013, and later issued a resolution dated the fourth of February, 2014. Aggrieved, the Commission on Audit sought relief from the Court of Appeals through a petition for review. The petition was dismissed by the Court of Appeals in a resolution dated the thirteenth of May, 2014, for two grounds: first, for failure to file the petition timely, the deadline having been on or before the twenty-eighth of March, 2014, as fixed by the petitioner's own motion for time; and second, for failure to attach duplicate original or certified true copies of the questioned decision and resolution, as well as the pertinent pleadings, documents, and material records referred to in the petition. It is this dismissal that the Commission on Audit brought before the Supreme Court.

Facts

The Commission on Audit was a party before the Civil Service Commission, which issued a decision and a subsequent resolution adverse to its interests. Seeking to reverse these rulings, the Commission on Audit filed a petition for review with the Court of Appeals.

In the course of the proceedings before the Court of Appeals, the petitioner asked for additional time to file its petition, and the Court granted this request, fixing the deadline on or before the twenty-eighth of March, 2014. The petitioner, however, failed to file its petition within this period.

Apart from the late filing, the petition was also defective for failure to attach duplicate original or certified true copies of the questioned decision and resolution dated the sixth of August, 2013 and the fourth of February, 2014, respectively, as well as the pertinent pleadings, documents, and material records referred to therein. These omissions prompted the Court of Appeals to dismiss the petition outright.

Issues

• Whether or not the Court of Appeals correctly dismissed the petition for review on the ground that it was filed out of time, the deadline having been fixed on or before the twenty-eighth of March, 2014, as per the petitioner's own motion for time.
• Whether or not the Court of Appeals correctly dismissed the petition for review on the ground that the petitioner failed to attach duplicate original or certified true copies of the questioned decision and resolution, as well as the pertinent pleadings, documents, and material records referred to.

Applicable Provisions

The Court of Appeals, in dismissing the petition, applied the rule on the timely perfection of an appeal. The resolution states the ground as follows:

The Court dismisses the petition for failure to file the same timely, on or before 28 March 2014, as per petitioner's motion for time.

This provision bears on the case because it fixes the period within which the petition for review must be filed, and the petitioner failed to comply with the deadline it itself had requested.

The Court of Appeals also applied the rule requiring the attachment of material documents to the petition. The resolution states the ground as follows:

The Court dismisses the petition for failure to attach duplicate original or certified true copies of the questioned Decision and Resolution dated 06 August 2013 and 04 February 2014, respectively; attach pertinent pleadings/documents and such material records referred to.

This provision bears on the case because it requires the petitioner to complete the record by attaching the very decision and resolution under review, as well as the supporting pleadings and documents, so that the appellate court may properly evaluate the petition.

Ruling

On the first issue, the Court of Appeals held that the petition for review was filed out of time. The deadline for filing was on or before the twenty-eighth of March, 2014, as fixed by the petitioner's own motion for time. The petitioner failed to meet this deadline, and the Court of Appeals accordingly dismissed the petition on this ground.

On the second issue, the Court of Appeals held that the petition was defective for failure to attach duplicate original or certified true copies of the questioned decision and resolution dated the sixth of August, 2013 and the fourth of February, 2014, respectively, as well as the pertinent pleadings, documents, and material records referred to. This omission was an independent ground for dismissal.

The Supreme Court, in its resolution, quoted the Court of Appeals resolution and dismissed the petition before it, thereby affirming the dismissal by the Court of Appeals. The Court's resolution states:

The Court dismisses the petition for failure to file the same timely, on or before 28 March 2014, as per petitioner's motion for time; attach duplicate original or certified true copies of the questioned Decision and Resolution dated 06 August 2013 and 04 February 2014, respectively; attach pertinent pleadings/documents and such material records referred to.

The Court thus resolved both issues against the petitioner, holding that the failure to file the petition within the period fixed by its own motion for time, and the failure to attach the required documents, warranted the dismissal of the petition.

Doctrine

The case stands for the rule that the right to appeal is not a natural right but a statutory privilege, and a party seeking to appeal must strictly comply with the requirements of the rules. The period for filing a petition for review, once fixed by the court upon the petitioner's own motion for time, is mandatory and cannot be extended at the petitioner's convenience. A petition that is filed beyond this period is subject to dismissal.

Furthermore, the rules require the petitioner to attach to the petition duplicate original or certified true copies of the decision and resolution under review, as well as the pertinent pleadings, documents, and material records referred to. Failure to comply with this requirement is a ground for dismissal, as the appellate court cannot properly evaluate the petition without the complete record.

These rules are tied to the quoted provisions of the Court of Appeals resolution, which expressly state the grounds for dismissal: failure to file the petition timely, on or before the twenty-eighth of March, 2014, and failure to attach the required documents. A Bar candidate should remember that procedural rules on the timeliness and completeness of an appeal are strictly construed, and non-compliance may result in the dismissal of the appeal regardless of the merits.

Disposition

The Supreme Court dismissed the petition, thereby affirming the dismissal by the Court of Appeals of the petition for review filed by the Commission on Audit.

Remember This

The single line worth memorizing is that the period for filing a petition for review, once fixed by the court upon the petitioner's own motion for time, is mandatory, and failure to comply, together with the failure to attach the required documents, warrants dismissal. Examiners like to use this case to test a reviewee's grasp of the strict application of procedural rules on the timeliness and completeness of an appeal, and the consequences of non-compliance.