The Court of Appeals has dismissed the petition of the Department of Budget and Management seeking to enjoin the payment of retirement benefits worth P139 million to a group of retired public attorneys.
In a 15-page decision, the CA’s 12th Division junked the petition filed by DBM last year seeking for a reversal of the ruling of the Quezon City Regional Trial Court, Branch 230, which ordered the release of the retirement benefits for retired lawyers of the Public Attorney's Office
The appellate court instead upheld the ruling of the lower court that voided DBM Legal Services Opinion No. 14 issued in November 2015 by former DBM Secretary Florencio Abad, which based the benefits of retired PAO lawyers on average of their salaries during service with the agency.
The assailed RTC ruling rendered by Judge Maria Gilda Loja-Pangilinan held that retired PAO lawyers are entitled to the same retirement privileges as those of their counterparts in the National Prosecution Service under the Republic Act 9406 or the PAO law and that reference shall be made on the retirement benefits of the prosecutors in the National Prosecution Service presently governed by the NAPROSS Law or Republic Act No. 11071.
According to the appellate court, the decision of the RTC was already final and executory which made the petition moot and academic.
"Notwithstanding the Court's disposition of the procedural issues, the instant petition remains dismissible. It has been rendered moot and academic by virtue of the entry of judgment made by the trial court on May 27, 2017, and more importantly by the admitted disbursement of retirement benefits of the private respondents consistent with the PAO Law and NAPROSS Law," the CA said, in a ruling penned by Associate Justice Gabriel Robeniol.
"Pursuant to the Entry of Judgment dated May 27, 2017, the Trial Court's decision dated Feb. 14, 2017 had already acquired finality and had thus become immutable and unalterable. The subsequent compliance with the directive therein made through the release and payment of the gratuity differentials of private respondents rendered the said Decision also fully executed," the appellate court added.
The CA also ruled that since the case was already moot, its review on the validity of the DBM legal opinion would no longer have any use.
"The only remaining legal consequence of this Court's judgment in the Petition is the affirmation of the propriety of the issuance of the DBM LS Opinion No. 14 or its rejection for being issued with grave abuse of discretion. Such a disposition, under the circumstances, would reduce the Court's judgment to a mere advisory opinion which does not have factual consequence," it said.
The DBM earlier withheld the benefits of the retired PAO lawyers despite resolutions issued by both the House committee on justice and Senate committee on finance last January supporting the release of the retirement benefits.
The petition in the RTC questioning the DBM legal opinion was filed in June 2016 by retired PAO lawyers led by Elpidio Bacuyag, who are now senior citizens.
The PAO retirees questioned the withholding of their retirement benefits, saying most of them are already ailing and that two of their members had already passed away.