SECOND DIVISION
[G.R. No. 145972. March 23, 2004]
IGNACIA BALICAS, petitioner, vs. FACT-F FACT-FINING INING ! INT"LLIG"NC" B#R"A# $FFIB%, &FFIC" &F T'" &MB#SMAN, respondent . "CISI&N (#IS#MBING, J .) .) This This peti petiti tion on for for revi review ew on certiorari ass certiorari assail ails s the Court of Appeals decision[1] dated Auust !"# !$$$ and resolution[!] of Nove%&er 1'# !$$$ in CA()*+* S, No* "-'.-# which affir%ed the O%&uds%ans ['] decision dis%issin petitioner fro% overn%ent service for ross nelect of dut/ in connection with the traed/ at the Cherr/ 0ills Su&division in Antipolo Cit/ on Auust '# 1* The The ante antece cede dent nt fact facts s as su%% su%%ar ari2 i2ed ed in the the O%&uds%ans decision are as follows3 4ased on the evidence adduced &/ the co%plainant# the followin is the chronoloical series of events which led to the develo elop%ent of the C0S 5Cherr/ 0ills Su&division63 Auust !.# 1$ ,hil7as Corporation# whose pri%ar/ purposes# a%on others are3 to own# develop# su÷# %ar8et and provide low(cost housin for the poor# was rei eister stered ed with the Secur ecuriities ies and and E9chan chane e Co%%ission 5SEC6* :e&ruar/ 1# 11 then Cit/ ;a/or Daniel S* )arcia# endors endorsed ed to the 0ousi 0ousin n and
;arch 11# &ased on the favora&le reco%%end reco%%endation ations s of ;a/or ;a/or )arcia# )arcia# respondent respondent TAN# AN# issu issued ed the the ,rel ,reli% i%in inar ar/ / Appro pprova vall and and 6 and with 1#$$' salea&le lotsunits with pro7ect classification 4*,* !!$ ;odel A(Sociali2ed 0ousin 5p* -# +ecords6# with seve everal conditions for its develop%ent* Three 5'6 da/s thereafter or on ?ul/ .# 11# respondent ?ASA+ENO# ?ASA+ENO# allowedranted the levelinearth(%ovin levelinearth(%ovin
oper operat atio ions ns of the the devel develop op%e %ent nt pro7 pro7ec ectt of the the area area su&7ect to certain conditions* On Nove%& Nove%&er er 1.# 11# 11# then then 0<=+4 0<=+4 Co%%is Co%%issio sioner ner A;ADO 4* DE- in favor of C0S# with #$$> lot lotsun sunit its s in the su&division* Even Eventu tual all/ l/## on Dece Dece%& %&er er 1$# 1$# 11 11## resp respon onde dent nt ,O<# 1># 1@ 1@## resp respon onde dent nt ;A)N ;A)NO# O# infor%ed E(+1(!1!(@* ECC(1'>(+1(!1!(@* A ;inin :ield +eport for SS;, dated ;a/ 1$# 1@ was su&% su&%it itte ted d purs pursua uant nt to the the insp inspec ecti tion on repo report rt prepared prepared &/ respondent respondents s CAE CAETA TANO# NO# :E
On Septe%&er !@# 1@# )OV* CASI;I+O I* NA+ES# ?+*# approved the SS;, applied for &/ ,hil7as under SS;, No* +B<($1!# allowin ,hil7as to e9tract and re%ove "$#$$$ %etric tons of fillin %aterials fro% the area for a period of two 5!6 /ears fro% date of its issue until Septe%&er -# 1-*[@] I%%ediatel/ after the traic incident on Auust '# 1# a fact(findin investiation was conducted &/ the Office of the O%&uds%an throuh its :act(:indin and Intellience 4ureau 5::I46# which dul/ filed an ad%inistrative co%plaint with the Office of the O%&uds%an aainst several officials of the 0ousin and and noted no violation thereon* She further clai%ed ood faith and e9ercise of due dilience# insistin that the traed/ was a fortuitous event* She reasoned that the collapse did not occur in Cherr/ 0ills# &ut in the ad7acent %ountain eastern side of the su&division* On Nove%&er 1"# 1# the Office of the O%&uds%an rendered a decision i%posin upon petitioner the supre%e penalt/ of dis%issal fro% office for ross nelect of dut/ findin3 +ES,ONDENT 4A
reco%%endations re3 its possi&le adverse effect to the environ%ent and to the residents of the C0S and n ear&/ areas* 0er defense that the position of the C0S shows the i%possi&ilit/ of chec8in the would(&e adverse effect clearl/ esta&lished her inco%petence* No e9pert %ind is needed to 8now that %ountains cause landslide and erosion*Cherr/ 0ills Su&division is a livin witness to this*["] ,etitioner seasona&l/ filed a petition for review of the O%&uds%ans decision with the Court of Appeals* In its decision dated Auust !"# !$$$# the Court of Appeals dis%issed the petition for lac8 of %erit and affir%ed the appealed decision* It found that the landslide was a preventa&le occurrence and that petitioner was uilt/ of ross nelience in failin to closel/ %onitor ,hil7as co%pliance with the conditions of the ECC iven the 8nown inherent insta&ilit/ of the round where the su&division was developed* The appellate court li8ewise denied petitioners %otion for reconsideration in its resolution dated Nove%&er 1'# !$$$* ,etitioner now co%es to this Court for review on certiorari # under +ule @" of the +ules of Civil ,rocedure# of the appellate courts decision* She allees that the Court of Appeals co%%itted serious errors of law in affir%in the O%&uds%ans conclusion that3 1 There was ross nelience on the part of petitioner 4alicas in the perfor%ance of her official duties as Senior Environ%ental ;anae%ent Specialist 5SE;S6 of the ,rovincial Environ%ent and Natural +esources Office 5,EN+O6 ,rovince of +i2al# DEN+ +eion IVF and the alleed ross nelect of dut/ of petitioner warranted the i%position of the e9tre%e penalt/ of dis%issal fro% the service* !* The landslide which caused the death of several residents of the su&division and the destruction of propert/ is not a fortuitous event and therefore preventi&le*[-] The %ain issues are whether or not the Court of Appeals co%%itted serious errors of law in3 516 holdin petitioner uilt/ of ross nelect of dut/ and 5!6 i%posin upon her the e9tre%e penalt/ of dis%issal fro% office* In order to ascertain if there had &een ross nelect of dut/# we have to loo8 at the lawfull/ prescri&ed duties of petitioner* =nfortunatel/# DEN+ reulations are silent on the specific duties of a senior environ%ental %anae%ent specialist* Internal reulations %erel/ spea8 of the functions of the ,rovincial Environ%ent and Natural +esources Office 5,EN+O6 to which petitioner directl/ reports* Nonetheless# petitioner relies on a letter [>] dated Dece%&er 1'# 1 fro% the chief of personnel# DEN+ +eion IV# which defines the duties of a senior environ%ental %anae%ent specialist as follows3 1* Conducts investiation of pollution sources or co%plaintsF
!* +eview[s] plans and specifications of proposes 5sic 6 or e9istin treat%ent plants and pollution a&ate%ent structures and devices to deter%ine their efficienc/ and suita&ilit/ for the 8ind of pollutants to &e re%oved and to reco%%end issuance or denial of per%itsF
4ased on the foreoin# the %onitorin duties of the ,EN+O %ainl/ deal with &road environ%ental concerns# particularl/ pollution a&ate%ent* This eneral %onitorin dut/ is applica&le to all t/pes of ph/sical develop%ents that %a/ adversel/ i%pact on the environ%ent# whether housin pro7ects# industrial sites# recreational facilities# or scientific underta8ins*
'* Conducts follow(up inspection of construction of pollution a&ate%entwor8 and structures to oversee co%pliance with approved plans and specificationsF
0owever# a %ore specific %onitorin dut/ is i%posed on the 0<=+4 as the sole reulator/ &od/ for housin and land develop%ent* It is %andated to encourae reater private sector participation in low(cost housin throuh 516 li&erali2ation of develop%ent standards# 5!6 si%plification of reulations and 5'6 decentrali2ation of approvals for per%its and licenses*[1!]
@* +eco%%ends re%edial %easures for the prevention# a&ate%ent and control of pollutionF "* ,repares technical reports on pollution investiation and related activitiesF and -* ,erfor%s related wor8 as assined* It is readil/ apparent that no %onitorin dut/ whatsoever is %entioned in the said letter* The ,EN+O# on the other hand# is %andated to3 1* conduct surveillance and inspection of pollution sources and control facilities and underta8einitiate %easures relative to pollution(related co%plaints of the eneral pu&lic for appropriate referral to the reional officeF !* co%%ent on the pro7ect description# deter%ine if the pro7ect fall within the Environ%ental I%pact State%ent 5EIS6 S/ste%[.] and su&%it the sa%e to the reional officeF and '* i%ple%ent prora%s and pro7ects related to environ%ental %anae%ent within the ,EN+O*[] In addition# the ,EN+O is li8ewise tas8ed to %onitor the pro7ect proponents co%pliance with the conditions stipulated in the ECC# with support fro% the DEN+ reional office and the Environ%ental ;anae%ent 4ureau*[1$] The pri%ar/ purpose of co%pliance %onitorin is to ensure the 7udicious i%ple%entation of sound and standard environ%ental ualit/ durin the develop%ent stae of a particular pro7ect* Specificall/# it ai%s to3 1* %onitor pro7ect co%pliance conditions set in the ECCF
with
the
!* %onitor co%pliance with the Environ%ental ;anae%ent ,lan 5E;,6 and applica&le laws# rules and reulationsF and '* provide a &asis for ti%el/ decision(%a8in and effective plannin and %anae%ent of environ%ental %easures throuh the %onitorin of actual pro7ect i%pacts vis((vis predicted i%pacts in the EIS* [11]
,*D* No* 1".-[1'] prescri&es the followin duties on the 0<=+4 5then ;inistr/ of 0u%an Settle%ents6 in connection with environ%entall/ critical pro7ects reuirin an ECC3 SECTION @* Presidential Proclamation of Environmentally Critical Areas and Projects* The ,resident of the ,hilippines %a/# on his own initiative or upon reco%%endation of the National Environ%ent ,rotection Council# &/ procla%ation declare certain pro7ects# underta8ins or areas in the countr/ as environ%entall/ critical* No person# partnership or corporation shall underta8e or operate an/ such declared environ%entall/ critical pro7ect or area without first securin an Environ%ental Co%pliance Certificate issued &/ the ,resident or his dul/ authori2ed representative* :or the proper %anae%ent of said critical pro7ect or area# the ,resident %a/ &/ his procla%ation reorani2e such overn%ent offices# aencies# institutions# corporations or instru%entalities includin the re(alin%ent of overn%ent personnel# and their specific functions and responsi&ilities* :or the sa%e purpose as a&ove# *h+ M*r/ o 'a S+**++* [o 'L#RB] ha) $a% r+ar+ *h+ ro+r a6 or a*+r + a**+r or a6 cr*ca ro+c*$% or ar+a$%8 $% +*ah a+* +:ro+*a ;a*/ *a6ar68 $c% 6+:+o a ro
nelect of dut/* The Court reversed the decision of the Court of Appeals and there&/ annulled the decision of the O%&uds%an in O;4(AD;($(--1# dated Dece%&er 1# 1# dis%issin ,rincipe fro% the overn%ent service* Ge ordered his reinstate%ent with &ac8 pa/ and without loss of seniorit/*[1"]
[']
CA 'ollo# pp* !-(>*
[@]
'ollo# pp* '$('!*
["]
CA 'ollo# pp* >$(>1*
[-]
'ollo# p* 1-*
The rationale for our decision in Principe &ears reiteration3 the responsi&ilit/ of %onitorin housin and land develop%ent pro7ects is not loded with the DEN+# &ut with the 0<=+4 as the sole reulator/ &od/ for housin and land develop%ent* Thus# we %ust stress that we find no leal &asis to hold petitioner# who is an officer of DEN+# lia&le for ross nelect of the dut/ pertainin to another aenc/# the 0<=+4* It was rave error for the appellate court to sustain the O%&uds%ans rulin that she should &e dis%issed fro% the service* The reinstate%ent of petitioner is clearl/ called for*
[>]
CA 'ollo# p* @1-*
[.]
,residential Decree No* 1".- defines the EIS s/ste% as3
>'"R"F&R"# the petition is here&/ )+ANTED* The Court of Appeals decision affir%in the O%&uds%ans dis%issal of petitioner I)NACIA 4A
SECTION !* Environmental Impact $tatement $ystem* There is here&/ esta&lished an Environ%ental I%pact State%ent S/ste% founded and &ased on the environ%ental i%pact state%ent reuired# under Section @ of ,residential Decree No* 11"1# of all aencies and instru%entalities of the national overn%ent# includin overn%ent( owned or controlled corporations# as well as private corporations# fir%s and entities# for ever/ proposed pro7ect and underta8in which sinificantl/ affect the ualit/ of the environ%ent* []
+evised +eulations on the Delineation of :unctions and Deleation of Authorities ,ursuant to E9ecutive Order No* 1!* DEN+ Ad%inistrative Order No* '.($*
[1$]
DEN+ Ad%inistrative Order No* -('>*
Callejo,
[11]
,rocedural ;anual for DEN+ Ad%inistrative Order No* -('>*
[1!]
E9ecutive Order No* $# dated Dece%&er 1># 1.-*
[1'] [1]
[!]
'ollo# pp* '$('.* ,enned &/ Associate ?ustice 0ilarion <* Auino# with Associate ?ustices 4uenaventura ?* )uerrero and ;ercedes )o2o(Dadole concurrin* Id * at '*
Otherwise 8nown as the Environ%ental I%pact State%ent S/ste% law# which too8 effect on ?une 11# 1>.*
[1@]
)*+* No* 1@">'# !' ?anuar/ !$$!# '>@ SC+A @-$*
[1"]
Id * at @>$*
