G.R. No.

141149 July 5, 2002

SEBASTIAN GARCIA, petitioner,
vs.
JUANITO A. PAJARO and THE CITY OF DAGUPAN, respondents.
Facts:
Sebastian Garcia, aged 61 and married, served as a local government employee at the City
Treasurer’s Office in Dagupan City since June 15, 1974. He held the position of a Revenue
Collector, appointed by the then City Mayor Cipriano Manaois. However, his tenure became
embroiled in controversy when he was suspended by City Treasurer Juanito Pajaro from June 1,
1990, to March 15, 1992. The suspension was accompanied by the withholding of Garcia's salary
due to a formal charge filed against him.

The formal charge levied against Garcia included allegations of gross neglect of duty, refusal to
perform official duties, and insubordination. The charges originated from his unsatisfactory
performance ratings and his failure to comply with the responsibilities associated with his
position. The City Treasurer asserted that Garcia, a Senior Revenue Collector, reported to Viray,
the Chief of Local Taxes, the Assistant City Treasurer, and to the City Treasurer himself.

Garcia, however, contested the suspension, asserting that he continued reporting for work during
the suspension period as he did not honor the order. He questioned the legitimacy of the
suspension, arguing that the City Treasurer acted as the complainant, investigator, and judge
without any formal complaint from the Office of the City Mayor. Moreover, he claimed that the
suspension order had severe financial implications, causing sleepless nights and affecting his
family's well-being. Garcia, who did not believe in the order, refused to submit himself for
investigation, leading to the withholding of his salary.

In addition to his suspension-related grievances, Garcia asserted that from July to October 1987,
the City Treasurer refused to provide him with his COLA, differential, cash gift, salary, and mid-
year bonus, amounting to ₱6,800.00 up to the present. He alleged that his salary had been
wrongfully withheld, impacting his family's financial stability. Furthermore, he contended that
despite his continuous performance of duties, he was unjustly charged by the City Treasurer for
neglect of duties, causing him emotional distress.

Garcia, seeking redress, demanded ₱1,000,000.00 for mental anguish and suffering, ₱250,000.00
for the alleged false charges, and the payment of the withheld benefits and salaries. He also
brought to light his unsuccessful attempts to avail of a calamity loan during the 1990 earthquake,
which the City Treasurer reportedly denied.

In response, the City Treasurer, Juanito Pajaro, aged 65 and married, defended the suspension,
highlighting Garcia's unsatisfactory performance ratings over several semesters. He asserted that
the formal charge was filed against Garcia in accordance with civil service laws and procedures,
and a preventive suspension of ninety (90) days was duly imposed. Pajaro claimed that Garcia,
despite being given a chance to explain himself, refused to attend the investigation and failed to
honor a subpoena.

Pajaro further argued that the charges against Garcia stemmed from the latter's opposition to the
appointment of Mrs. Evangeline Estrada to a supervisory position, a position eventually
confirmed by the Civil Service Commission (CSC). Pajaro contended that Garcia's subsequent
suspension was justified and, in fact, Garcia was not acquitted but penalized with a six-month
suspension without pay.

The City of Dagupan, as a party in the case, adopted the evidence presented by City Treasurer
Pajaro.

Issue:

1) Whether the city treasurer of Dagupan has the authority to discipline Sebastian Garcia.
2) Whether Sebastian Garcia's right to due process was violated during the administrative
proceedings.
Decision:

The Court affirmed the authority of the city treasurer to discipline Garcia, as the latter was a
subordinate officer under the former's jurisdiction. The court clarified that the power to
discipline includes the power to investigate, and the city treasurer acted within his authority.
The Court ruled that Garcia's right to due process was not violated. He was given notice of the
charges, a preventive suspension order was issued, and an opportunity for investigation was
provided. Garcia's refusal to attend the scheduled hearings was at his own peril, and he cannot
claim a denial of due process.
WHEREFORE, the Petition is hereby DENIED and the assailed Decision AFFIRMED. Costs
against petitioner.
SO ORDERED.