G.R. No.
183678 March 15, 2010 [Administrative Case; Concurrent Jurisdiction]
FACTS:
Rene V.
Puse, a registered Professional Teacher, married Ligaya Delos-Santos on January
10, 1992. He had two children with her.
When Ligaya learned of Rene's deception regarding his marital status, she filed a criminal case for bigamy against her husband before the MTC of Jose Panganiban, Camarines Norte. On August 2, 2005, she filed a letter-complaint with the Director of the Professional Regulation Commission (PRC), National Capital Region, Manila, through the Director, PRC, Lucena City, seeking assistance regarding her husband against whom she had filed a criminal case for “Bigamy” and “Abandonment.”
Rene reiterated the arguments in his Answer and prayed for the dismissal of the complaint on the ground that it was not verified and for failure of the respondent to attach a valid certification against forum-shopping. He argued that the proper forum to hear and decide the complaint was either the CSC pursuant to CSC Resolution No. 991936 (Uniform Rules on Administrative Cases in the Civil Service) or the DepEd pursuant to Rep. Act No. 4670 (Magna Carta for Public School Teachers). Since the charge was for violation of the Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards for Public Officials and Employees, the complaint should have been brought before the CSC.
On 16 February 2007, the Board of Professional Teachers (Board), PRC, Manila, found Rene administratively liable of the charges and revoked his license as a Professional Teacher. Rene moved for reconsideration of motion but was denied by the Board. He then filed a petition for review before the CA. CA denied the Rene's appeal. CA held that the applicable law was Rep. Act No. 4670 or the Magna Carta for Public School Teachers because he is a Teacher I. Under Rep. Act No. 4670, the one (1) tasked to investigate the complaint was the Board of Professional Teachers. It was the Board of Professional Teachers that had jurisdiction over the administrative case and not the Civil Service Commission (CSC) or the Department of Education (DepEd) as contended by Rene.
ISSUE:
Whether
or not the Board of Professional Teachers have jurisdiction to hear and decide the complaint filed by respondent against petitioner.
RULING:
Yes. An administrative case against a public school teacher may be filed before the Board of Professional Teachers-PRC, the DepEd or the CSC, which have concurrent jurisdiction over administrative cases such as for immoral, unprofessional or dishonorable conduct. Concurrent jurisdiction is that which is possessed over the same parties or subject matter at the same time by two or more separate tribunals. When the law bestows upon a government body the jurisdiction to hear and decide cases involving specific matters, it is to be presumed that such jurisdiction is exclusive unless it be proved that another body is likewise vested with the same jurisdiction, in which case, both bodies have concurrent jurisdiction over the matter. The authority to hear and decide administrative cases by the Board of Professional Teachers-PRC, DepEd and the CSC comes from Rep. Act No. 7836, Rep. Act No. 4670 and Presidential Decree (P.D.) No. 807, respectively.
Under Section 23 of Rep. Act No. 7836, the Board is given the power, after due notice and hearing, to suspend or revoke the certificate of registration of a professional teacher for causes enumerated therein. Among the causes is immoral, unprofessional or dishonorable conduct. Thus, if a complaint is filed under Rep. Act No. 7836, the jurisdiction to hear the same falls with the Board of Professional Teachers-PRC.
If the complaint against a public school teacher is filed with the DepEd, then under Section 9 of Rep. Act No. 4670 or the Magna Carta for Public School Teachers, the jurisdiction over administrative cases of public school teachers is lodged with the investigating committee created pursuant to said section, now being implemented by Section 2, Chapter VII of DECS Order No. 33, S. 1999, also known as the DECS Rules of Procedure. A complaint filed under Rep. Act No. 4670 shall be heard by the investigating committee which is under the DepEd.
The CSC has jurisdiction to supervise and discipline all government employees including those employed in government-owned or controlled corporations with original charters. Consequently, if civil service rules and regulations are violated, complaints for said violations may be filed with the CSC.
However, where concurrent jurisdiction exists in several tribunals, the body or agency that first takes cognizance of the complaint shall exercise jurisdiction to the exclusion of the others. Here, it was the Board of Professional Teachers, before which respondent filed the complaint, that acquired jurisdiction over the case and which had the authority to proceed and decide the case to the exclusion of the DepEd and the CSC.
Under Section 23 of Rep. Act No. 7836, the Board is given the power, after due notice and hearing, to suspend or revoke the certificate of registration of a professional teacher for causes enumerated therein. Among the causes is immoral, unprofessional or dishonorable conduct. Thus, if a complaint is filed under Rep. Act No. 7836, the jurisdiction to hear the same falls with the Board of Professional Teachers-PRC.
If the complaint against a public school teacher is filed with the DepEd, then under Section 9 of Rep. Act No. 4670 or the Magna Carta for Public School Teachers, the jurisdiction over administrative cases of public school teachers is lodged with the investigating committee created pursuant to said section, now being implemented by Section 2, Chapter VII of DECS Order No. 33, S. 1999, also known as the DECS Rules of Procedure. A complaint filed under Rep. Act No. 4670 shall be heard by the investigating committee which is under the DepEd.
The CSC has jurisdiction to supervise and discipline all government employees including those employed in government-owned or controlled corporations with original charters. Consequently, if civil service rules and regulations are violated, complaints for said violations may be filed with the CSC.
However, where concurrent jurisdiction exists in several tribunals, the body or agency that first takes cognizance of the complaint shall exercise jurisdiction to the exclusion of the others. Here, it was the Board of Professional Teachers, before which respondent filed the complaint, that acquired jurisdiction over the case and which had the authority to proceed and decide the case to the exclusion of the DepEd and the CSC.
