FIRST DIVISION

[G.R. No. 221067. January 14, 2019.]

BASILIA C. CUBILLO , petitioner, vs. SOCIAL SECURITY

SYSTEM, respondent.

NOTICE

Sirs/Mesdames :

Please take notice that the Court, First Division, issued a Resolution
dated January 14, 2019, which reads as follows:
"G.R. No. 221067 (BASILIA C. CUBILLO, Petitioner, v. SOCIAL
SECURITY SYSTEM, Respondent) — By this petition for review, 1 the
petitioner Basilia C. Cubillo seeks to set aside the Court of Appeals (CA)
decision 2 promulgated on March 4, 2015 in CA-G.R. SP No. 128833 entitled
"Social Security System, petitioner, v. Civil Service Commission and Basilia C.
Cubillo, respondents."

Antecedents

The facts as summarized by the Court of Appeals are as follows:

On 5 October 2009 respondent Basilia C. Cubillo wrote a letter
to respondent Civil Service Commission requesting for the
accreditation as government service of her contractual services
rendered with petitioner Social Security System (SSS) for the period
of March 19, 1977 to February 29, 1988.
On 18 November 2009 Anicia Marasigan-De Lima, former CSC
Assistant Commissioner granted Cubillo's request. As a result, Cubillo
requested SSS for an adjustment in the computation of her incentive
under the SSS Rationalization Plan.
On 6 July 2010 Marissa L. Tizon, Head of the SSS Human
Resource Services sought clarification from CSC as regards the
granting of Cubillo's request. She maintained that per Section A of
CSC Memorandum Circular No. 19 series of 2006 retired officials and
employees can no longer request for accreditation of services.
Director Hans R. Alcantara sustained the grant of Cubillo's
request. He opined that a request for accreditation can be granted as
long as the employee has not filed any claim for retirement benefits
pursuant to CSC Resolution No. 081462 dated 24 July 2008. CAIHTE

Dissatisfied, SSS, through its Vice-President, Attorney Jesse J.

Caberoy sought further clarification from Director Myrna V.
Macatangay who sustained the opinion of Dir. Alcantara. Accordingly,
Dir. Macatangay held that if it is the impression of SSS that Cubillo
CD Technologies Asia, Inc. © 2021 cdasiaonline.com
 already received her retirement benefits prior to the filing of her
request of accreditation, then she can no longer claim additional
benefits, notwithstanding any order of accreditation from CSC.
Guided by these, SSS denied Cubillo's request for the payment
of her incentive.
Cubillo appealed to the CSC.
The CSC disposed her appeal in a Decision dated 24 September
2012 in this wise:
WHEREFORE, the appeal of Basilia C. Cubillo, a
former employee of the Social Security System (SSS), is
hereby GRANTED. Accordingly, Cubillo's creditable
government service covering the period of March 19,
1977 to February 29, 1988 shall be included in the
computation of her incentive provided under the SSS
Rationalization Plan (Executive Order No. 366).
The SSS filed a motion for reconsideration but the same was
denied in a Resolution dated 28 January 2013.
On appeal, the CA reversed the findings of the CSC, the dispositive
portion reads:
WHEREFORE, in view of the foregoing, the petition is GRANTED.
Accordingly, the Decision No. 120625 dated 24 September 2012 and
Resolution No. 1300218 dated 28 January 2013 of the Civil Service
Commission are hereby ANNULLED and SET ASIDE.
SO ORDERED.
The petitioner filed a Motion for Reconsideration 3 and Supplemental
Motion for Reconsideration 4 but were denied by the CA in its September 14,
2015 Resolution. Hence, this petition for review.
The petitioner contends herein that the CA erroneously issued a
judgment based on a misapprehension of facts and without full
consideration of the evidence presented; that the CA has decided a question
of substance, which had not yet been determined by the Supreme Court,
which warrants deliberation by the highest court of the land; and that the CA
erroneously issued a judgment based on a misapprehension of facts and
without full consideration of the evidence presented. 5
The Social Security System countered that the CA did not err in ruling
that the petitioner failed to comply with the requirements prevailing at the
time she retired that would have entitled her to the retirement benefits
under EO 366. 6
In her reply, 7 the petitioner maintains that she is qualified to the
adjustment by the SSS of her incentive considering that Paragraph A of CSC
Resolution No. 062179 had already been amended by CSC Resolution No.
1401316 dated September 12, 2014. 8

Our Ruling

CD Technologies Asia, Inc. © 2021 cdasiaonline.com

 We deny the petition.
After a full review of the records, we find that the CA's findings are in
accord with the law and jurisprudence, the quoted portion of their decision
reads:
The elementary rule in statutory construction is that when the
words and phrases of the statute are clear and unequivocal, their
meaning must be determined from the language employed and the
statute must be taken to mean exactly what it says. If a statute is
clear, plain and free from ambiguity, it must be given its literal
meaning and applied without attempted interpretation. This is what is
known as the plain-meaning rule or verba legis. It is expressed in the
maxim, index animi sermo, or speech is the index of intention.
Furthermore, there is the maxim verba legis non est recedendum, or
from the words of a statute there should be no departure. Guided by
these principles, courts have no alternative but to apply the law
according to its clear language.
These all too-familiar rules in statutory construction are
applicable to administrative rules such as in this case. DETACa

The pertinent portion of CSC Resolution No. 062179, amending

CSC Resolution No. 021481, reads:
A. Officials and employees who rendered actual
services pursuant to defective appointments or without
any appointment, except those who have already retired,
may request for inclusion of said services in their official
service record in the Commission.
From a simple reading of the above-quoted provision, it can
readily be discerned that the provision is clear and unambiguous.
Employees and officials who have already retired can no longer
request for accreditation. Here, Cubillo is deemed to have retired
from SSS on 15 July 2009 as provided in SSS Office Order No.
200908315 whereas her request for accreditation was only made on
5 October 2009. Therefore, she can no longer request for
accreditation. In fact, at the time of filing of her request, the proceeds
of her retirement benefits has already been deposited in her payroll
account.
Where a requirement or condition is made in explicit and
unambiguous terms, no discretion is left to the judiciary. It must see
to it that its mandate is obeyed.
Finally, we cannot sustain the claim being made by the petitioner to
apply CSC Resolution No. 1401316 in her favor. The pertinent portion of the
said resolution reads:
WHEREFORE, the Commission RESOLVES to amend Section A of
Resolution No. 062179 dated December 6, 2006, as follows:
A. Actual services rendered starting January 1, 2015 pursuant
to a defective appointment or without any appointment
shall no longer be accredited as government service.
However, officials and employees who rendered actual services
before January 1, 2015 pursuant to defective appointments
CD Technologies Asia, Inc. © 2021 cdasiaonline.com
 or without any appointment, except those who have
already retired under existing laws but not under Executive
Order No. 366, may submit the request for the inclusion of
said services with the CSC Regional Office (CSCRO)
concerned until the last working day of 2014 only.
Henceforth, the CSC shall no longer accept any request for
accreditation of service pursuant to defective appointments
or without any appointment.

xxx xxx xxx (Emphasis supplied)

Notably, CSC Resolution No. 1401316 covers only "officials and

employees who rendered actual services before January 1, 2015 pursuant to
defective appointments or without any appointment." Herein petitioner asks
retroactive application of the said resolution for the period of March 19, 1977
until July 15, 2009 as a contractual employee for the Social Security System
(SSS). Unfortunately, her services as a contractual employee was not based
on a defective appointment or even the lack thereof. As such, her claim for
adjustment of incentive under CSC Resolution No. 1401316 does not avail.
WHEREFORE, the Court DENIES the petition for review for being
unmeritorious and AFFIRMS the March 4, 2015 Decision and September 14,
2015 Resolution by the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. SP No. 128833 entitled
"Social Security System, petitioner, v. Civil Service Commission and Basilia C.
Cubillo, respondents." aDSIHc

SO ORDERED."

Very truly yours,

(SGD.) LIBRADA C. BUENA

Division Clerk of Court

Footnotes

1. Rollo , pp. 8-16.

2. Id. at 32-35; penned by Associate Justice Socorro B. Inting with the concurrence
of Associate Justice Hakim S. Adbulwahid and Associate Justice Priscilla J.
Baltazar-Padilla.
3. Id. at 37-43.

4. Id. at 48-52.
5. Id. at 12.

6. Id. at 85.
7. Id. at 112-114.

8. Id. at 113.
CD Technologies Asia, Inc. © 2021 cdasiaonline.com