OMB; Appeal agency relative to the nature of its operation.

This
would also include incurrence of expenditure not
Lapid vs. CA dictated by the demands of good government, and
those the utility of which cannot be ascertained at a
Lapid was suspended for 1 year. Pending appeal, the specific time. An expenditure that is not essential or
NBI, DILG and OMB wants the penalty immediately that which can be dispensed with without loss or
executed. damage to property is considered unnecessary. The
mission and thrust of the agency incurring the
Penalty cannot be immediately executed since no law expenditures must be considered in determining
allows it. A decision of the OMB finding him liable for whether or not an expenditure is necessary.
misconduct and imposing the penalty of one year
suspension without pay, is not among those listed in the
OMB Act of 1989 as final and unappealable. There is no
general legal principle that mandates that all decision of
quasi-judicial and administrative agencies are
immediately executory.

Lopez vs. CA and Liggayu

Liggayu was found guilty from issuing a subpoena

without authority and was sentenced with a 6 month
suspension without pay. While pending appeal, the
suspension was executed. *Same ruling with Lapid vs.
CA

*Ruling in Lapid ang Lopez has been overturned by AO-

17-03 which provides that an appeal shall not stop the
decision of the Ombudsman being executory.

NHA

NHA vs. COA

COA disallowed a contract extending the services of a

foreign consultant on the ground that his work could
well be performed by Filipinos. Hence, this petition.

The SC ruled that the petition was without merit. The

Constitution granted to COA the power to "promulgate
accounting and auditing rules and regulations, including
those for the prevention and disallowance of irregular,
unnecessary, excessive, extravagant, or unconscionable
expenditures, or uses of government funds and
properties."

The extension of the contract of the foreign consultant

is considered as an unnecessary expenditures under a
COA Circular which defines the term as expenditures
which could not pass the test of prudence or the
diligence of a good father of a family, thereby denoting
non-responsiveness to the exigencies of the service.
Unnecessary expenditures are those not supportive of
the implementation of the objectives and mission of the