SC affirms dismissal of ex-MEPZ official

CEBU – The Supreme Court has upheld the dismissal from post of the former deputy station commander of the Mactan Export Processing Zone.

Special Police Lt. Ramon Torredes, former deputy station commander of MEPZ, was charged by the president and members of the MEPZ Authority Drivers Association for exacting P1,000 per week from the association allegedly for the payment of parking fees.

However, the weekly exactions were not covered by official receipts.

Carlos Villamor, who is the president of the said association, initially agreed to such arrangement to facilitate the issuance of the identification cards by Torredes, as deputy station commander of the MEPZ Police Force, for the use at the PEZA Compound.

The joint affidavits of the other members of the association narrated that Torredes handed a letter to one of them “demanding one lechon from the drivers association for his birthday celebration.”

Fed up, the association led by its president discontinued the payment of P1,000 per week exaction and did not provide the roast pig as demanded by Torredes.

In his memorandum dated September 8, 1998, MEPZ administrator Dante Quindoza directed Torredes to explain in writing his answer to the complaints lodged by the drivers group.

Torredes categorically denied the charges contending that he is just strictly enforcing the rules and regulations of both the PEZA and the Land Transportation Office on cleanliness and traffic, and that “because of this strict implementation, he caught the ire of the drivers group.”

After the preliminary investigation and dissatisfied with the explanation of petitioner, PEZA formally charged him for violating Section 46 (4) and (27) of the Administrative Code and was found liable not only for grave misconduct but also for conduct grossly prejudicial to the best interest of the service.

As a result, Torredes was meted the penalty of dismissal from service.

Aggrieved of the decision, Torredes appealed the PEZA decision to the Civil Service Commission, which affirmed the PEZA decision.

Torredes then appealed the CSC decision to the Court of Appeals by way of petition for review under Rule 43 of the Rules of Court which was dismissed for his failure to implead and furnish PEZA a copy of his appeal.

Torredes elevated the matter to the Supreme Court asking to reverse CA’s dismissal of his appeal contending that PEZA is not the adverse party of the case.

“We do not subscribe to petitioner’s faulty logic. Petitioner’s contention conveniently ignores the administrative nature of this case and his position as a public officer,” the Supreme Court said in its order promulgated on September 11, this year.

The Supreme Court added that when Torredes appealed the PEZA decision to the CSC, he effectively challenged the disciplinary action taken by PEZA against him, making it necessary for PEZA to be impleaded in the case.

In effect, the Supreme Court dismissed the petition of Torredes and affirmed the decisions made by PEZA and the CSC. – Mitchelle L. Palaubsanon/MEEV (THE FREEMAN)