UP v.

LIGOT-TAN
227 SCRA 342 (1993)

FACTS
UP implemented the STFAP to make education more accessible. Nadal applied for
STFAP benefits but was found to have discrepancies in his application. A home investigation
revealed that Nadal had not disclosed certain information, such as his mother's income and the
ownership of a car. The University reclassified Nadal to a higher bracket and required
reimbursement of benefits received. Nadal was charged with willfully withholding information
and faced disciplinary action.

ISSUES
Whether the Board of Regents (BOR) violated Nadal's right to due process in rendering
its decision.

RULING
The BOR did not violate due process. Notice of the BOR meeting was not required as per
university rules. Nadal's case was deliberated in several meetings, and he was not deprived of the
opportunity to defend himself. Despite additional information about Nadal's scholarship from
another university, the essence of the charge remained the same. Nadal's inconsistency in
disclosing his mother's income was considered a sufficient admission of withholding
information. The court emphasized the importance of honesty and integrity in academic and
professional endeavors. Thus, the BOR's decision was upheld, and Nadal's petition was
dismissed.