Case Digest: UMALI v GUINGONA

UMALI v GUINGONA

FACTS

Osmundo Umali was appointed Regional Director of BIR by Pres. Ramos. Barely a year later, Ramos received a confidential memorandum against petitioner for malfeasance, misfeasance and nonfeasance9. Ramos then authorized Umali’s preventive suspension and referred the complaint to the PCAGC10 for investigation. PCAGC then issued a resolution finding a prima facie evidence to support 6 of the 12 charges against him. Hence, Ramos issued an administrative order dismissing him with forfeiture of retirement and all benefits under the law. Umali contends that as Regional Director, he belongs to the Career Executive Service with tenurial protection who can only be removed for cause even if he is a presidential appointee under the direct authority of the President.

ISSUES

Whether he may be validly removed from office.

HELD

Petitioner failed to prove that his is a CESO eligible, which is fatal to the case. NEVERTHELESS, the court allowed him to retire with full benefits by the exercise of the Supreme Court’s “equity powers”. This is because the Commissioner of the BIR manifested to the Ombudsman that his office is no longer interested in pursuing the case, hence, giving no more basis to the Administrative order.