Former Sixteenth (16) Division: Court of Appeals

You might also like

Download as pdf or txt
Download as pdf or txt
You are on page 1of 2

Republic of the Philippines

Court of Appeals
Manila

FORMER SIXTEENTH (16th) DIVISION

TECHNICAL EDUCATION CA-G.R. SP NO. 149459


AND SKILLS
DEVELOPMENT Members:
AUTHORITY (TESDA),
Petitioner, DIAMANTE, F.N.,
Chairperson,
PEREZ, P.A., and
*
ROXAS, R.R.G., JJ.
-versus-

Promulgated:

FLORANTE L. HERRERA, AUGUST 24, 2020


Respondent.

R E S O L U T I O N

PEREZ, J.:

For resolution is the Motion for Reconsideration1 filed by


petitioner Technical Education and Skills Development Authority
which seeks reconsideration of Our November_6, 2019 Decision,2
the decretal portion of which reads:

“WHEREFORE, the petition for review is DENIED.


The_Decision dated November_21,_2016 and the Resolution
dated January 17, 2017 of the Civil Service Commission in Case
No. 161378 are AFFIRMED.

SO ORDERED.”

In his Comment3 dated January 15, 2020, respondent


Florante L. Herrera prayed for the denial of petitioner's motion for
lack of merit.

*
Acting Third Member, per Office Order No. 508-19-RSF dated October 16, 2019.
1
Rollo, pp. 995-1002.
2
Ibid., pp. 981-991.
3
Ibid., pp. 1008-1013.
CA-G.R. SP NO. 149459 Page 2 of 2
RESOLUTION

The arguments and issues raised by petitioner as grounds


for reconsideration of Our ruling are the same arguments and
issues that have already been settled and resolved in the Decision
dated November_6, 2019 being sought to be reconsidered.

No legal or practical benefit inures if this Court were to


discuss and rule again on the grounds relied upon by the movants
which are merely a reiteration of the issues previously raised, and
thoroughly determined and evaluated in the Decision being
questioned.4

Since no new matters had been raised by petitioner and


private respondents, We see no cogent reason to disturb Our
November_6, 2019 Decision.

WHEREFORE, premises considered, the Motion for


Reconsideration filed by petitioner Technical Education and Skills
Development Authority is DENIED. Our Decision dated
November_6, 2019 STANDS.

SO ORDERED.

PABLITO A. PEREZ
Associate Justice

WE CONCUR:

FRANCHITO N. DIAMANTE
Associate Justice

RUBEN REYNALDO G. ROXAS


Associate Justice

4
Lumanog v. People of the Philippines, G.R. Nos. 182555, 185123, and 187745 (Resolution),
February_8, 2011, (Per J. Villarama, Jr., En Banc).

You might also like