I '

I •

REPUBLIKA NG PILIPINAS

GSIS

PASEGURUHAN NG MGA NAGLILINGKOD SA PAMAHALAAN (GOVERNMENT SERVICE INSURANCE SYSTEM) Financial Center, Roxas Boulevard, Pasay City 1308

BOARD OF TRUSTEES

In the Matter of Petition to Include Petitioner's Previous Years of Service In the Computation of his Retirement Benefits under R.A. No. 8291

JAIME A. SANCHEZ, Petitioner.

x- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - x

DECISION

Board Case No. 011-05

This is a Decision on the Petition filed by Petitioner Jaime A. Sanchez

on July 22, 2005, which seeks to set aside the denial by then GSIS

Committee on Claims Settlement of his application for retirement benefits

under Republic Act (R.A.) No. 8291. Specifically, the petition raises the

issue on whether or not his previous years of service, for which

corresponding benefits were paid, can be added to his subsequent services

when he re-entered the government service on September 2, 1991 for

purposes of retirement under Republic Act (R.A.) No. 8291.

Facts

On February 1, 1960, Petitioner joined the government service as an

employee of the Central Bank. On March 4, 1989, he availed of optional

retirement under R.A. No. 1616,1 after rendering a total of 29 years of

service. He received the amount of Four Hundred Fifty Four Thousand One

Hundred Seventy Nine Pesos and Ninety One Centavos (Php454, 179.91) as

1 An Act Further Amending Section Twelve of Commonwealth Act Numbered One Hundred Eighty-Six, as

Amended, by Prescribing Two Other Modes of Retirement and for Other Purposes; Gratuity Benefits plus Return of Contribution.

' . Board Case No. 011-05

Jaime A. Sanchez, Petitioner

Page 2

gratuity benefit from the Central Bank and the amount of Ninety Thousand

One Hundred Eighty Five Pesos and Forty One Centavos (Php90,185.41)

representing refund of his retirement premium contributions from the GSIS.

On September 2, 1991, Petitioner was re-employed as Department

Manager of the Philippine Export and Foreign Loan Guarantee Corporation

(PhilGuarantee) and retired therefrom as Senior Vice President effective

December 16, 1997 after rendering six (6) years of service.

Even before the effectivity of his second retirement, Petitioner filed an

application for retirement under R.A. No. 1616 on December 3, 1997 but

the same was denied by the Claims Department of the GSIS stating that

'1P]revious retirees who have been re-employed on or after May 3L 1977

hut before june 24/ 1997 and subsequently retired again when R.A. 8291 is

already in existence shall have the option to retire under PD 1146 or RA

On December 12, 2001, Petitioner filed a petition before the GSIS

Board of Trustees2 questioning the denial by the Claims Department of his

claim for retirement benefits under R.A. No. 1616. But, in his subsequent

letter dated February 23, 2004, Petitioner withdrew his petition then

pending before the Board of Trustees and applied for retirement benefits

under R.A. No. 8291.

2 Docketed as Board Case No. 003-01.

Board Case No. 011-05 Jaime A. Sanchez, Petitioner

Page 3

Considering that Petitioner failed to meet the service requirement of

fifteen ( 15) years to qualify for retirement benefits under Section 13 of R.A.

No. 8291, the GSIS Claims Department paid Petitioner his separation

benefit amounting to Sixty One Thousand Four Hundred Eighty Four Pesos

and Sixty Centavos (Php61,484.60) for his 6.14846 years of service from

September 2, 1991 (the date of his re-entry to PhilGuarantee) up to

December 15, 1997 (last day of service of the Petitioner). Petitioner

received the separation benefit on june 17, 2004.

In his letter dated june 25, 2004, Petitioner requested Mr. Carmelo

Garcia, then Manager of the Claims Department to re-evaluate his claim

taking into consideration his previous years of service from February 1960

to March 1989, which were covered by his previous retirement. Petitioner

claimed that he was entitled to a cash payment of eighteen (18) times the

basic monthly pension plus an old age pension for life upon reaching the

age of sixty (60) years.

In a letter dated july 21, 2004, Manager Garcia informed the

Petitioner that the period of service covered by his previous retirement

under R.A. No. 1616 was excluded from the computation of his service on

the basis of Section 10(b) of R.A. No. 8291, as follows:

Section 10. Computation of service.- (a) xxx XXX XX

(b) All service credited for retirement resignation or separation for which corresponding benefits have been awarded under this Act or other laws shall be excluded in the computation of service in case of reinstatement in the service of an employer and subsequent retirement or separation which is compensable under this Act.

; . Board Case No. 011-05

Jaime A. Sanchez, Petitioner Page 4

Aggrieved, Petitioner elevated the matter through a letter dated

September 17, 2004 to the then GSIS President and General Manager

(PGM) Winston Garcia who in turn referred the letter to Manager Carmelo

Garcia of the Claims Department. Through a letter dated November 5,

2004, Manager Garcia informed Petitioner of the denial by the GSIS

Committee on Claims Settlement of his request to credit his previous years

of service citing as basis Section 10(b) of R.A. No. 8291.

Hence, the petition.

While the case was pending, the former Board of Trustees approved

PPG No. 183-06 on january 4, 2006, which established a clear-cut policy in

the processing of retirement claims of re-employed government

officials/employees who had previously received retirement benefits. Under

this policy, employees who had previously retired and re-entered

government service before June 24, 1997 were allowed to retire again with

full service credit provided that they refund to the GSIS the retirement

benefits previously received. The affected members were given thirty (30)

days, reckoned from the date of publication of the said PPG, within which to

refund to the System the retirement benefits received from previous

retirement/separation. 3 The PPG was published in two (2) newspapers of

general circulation on January 31, 20064 and january 28, 20065,

respectively.

Through a letter dated February 4, 2006, Petitioner signified his

intention to avail of full retirement benefits under R.A. No. 8291 by re-

3 Page 3 of PPG No. 183-06 4 Philippine Star 5 Manila Bulletin

·. I '

Board Case No. 011-05 Jaime A. Sanchez, Petit ioner

Page 5

crediting his years of service covered by his previous retirement subject to

cash refund of the benefits received under R.A. No. 16166 pursuant to PPG

No. 183-06.

On February 27, 2006, Petitioner remitted to the GSIS the amount of

Php995,082 .357 representing refund of benefits received under R.A. No.

1616 and interests.

Subsequently, the GSIS Claims Department processed Petitioner's

retirement benefits under R.A. No. 8291. Petitioner's period of service from

1960 to 1989 covered by his first retirement under R.A. No. 1616 was

included in the computation of his second retirement under R.A. No. 8291 ,

giving him a total period with paid premiums of 35.61327.

The records show that on May 2, 2006, Petitioner was paid the

amount of Php1,202,404.44 representing his accrued pension from

December 1997 to May 31, 2006. The records further show that effective

June 1, 2006, Petitioner started receiving his monthly pension in the amount

of Php13,878.03.

Issue

In view of the abovementioned supervening events, the issue now is

whether the case should be dismissed for having become moot and

academic.

6 Copy of the Febr uary 4, 2006 letter was a ttached as Annex "2"of the Motion to Dismiss 7 Broken down as follows:

Gratuity Received Refund of premium contributions Interests (5/8/1989 - 2/28/2006) Cash payment/Separation benefits Interests

Php454,179.91 90,185.41

363,941.77 61,484.60 25.290.66

Php995,082.35

; '

Discussion

We answer in the affirmative.

Board Case No. 011-05

Jaime A. Sanchez, Petitioner Page 6

The processing by the Claims Department of Petitioner's retirement

benefits under RA. No. 8291 and the subsequent receipt by the Petitioner

of his retirement benefits based on his total years of government service

constitute supervening events which settled the issue pertinent to his

petition.

In fine, the circumstances which led to the filing of the instant petition

on July 22, 2005 were overtaken by supervening events, rendering the issue

raised therein moot and academic.

As ruled by the Supreme Court in Quino/ et al. vs. Comelec/ et al. 8/

"[A] case becomes moot and academic when there is no more actual

controversy between the parties or no useful purpose can be served in

passing upon the merits."

A moot and academic case is one that ceases to present a justiciable

controversy by virtue of supervening events, so that a declaration thereon

would be of no practical use or value. Generally, courts decline jurisdiction

over such case or dismiss it on ground of mootness. 9

8 G.R. No. 197466, November 13 2012; see a lso Enrile 1/S. Senate Electoral Tribunal, G.R. No. 132986, May 19, 2004; PNB liS. CA, G.R. No. 121251, june 26, 1998. 9 Magdalo Para sa Pagbabago 1/S. Comelec, G.R. No. 190793, j une 19, 2012; Funa vs. Executive Secretary Ermita, G.R. No. 184 740, February 11 , 2010; David liS. Macapagal-An-oyo, 522 Phil. 705 (2006).

.. · : . Board Case No. 011-05

Jaime A. Sanchez, Petitioner Page 7

WHEREFORE, the petition is hereby DISMISSED for being moot and

academic.

SO ORDERED.

Pasay City, Philippines, 2 4 JUL 2014

ROB RT G. V~ARA ce Chairman

ROMEO M. ALIP Trustee

~a ELISEA J~k Trustee

RO

L L. LACSON JR. Chairman

"' x~ _::_~~ KARINA CONSTANTINO-DAVID

Trustee

GERALDINE ~RiJERABE-MARTINEZ Trustee

Gb~.{t Trustee

FRANCISCO T. DUQUE nr

• Did not participate in the discussion

• ·•. ": f

Copy furnished:

PROSECUTION AND QUASI-JUDICIAL CASES DEPARTMENT Legal Services Group 6th Floor, GSIS Building, Financial Center, Pasay City

JAIME SANCHEZ Petitioner 56 W. Vinzons Street, BF Homes, Paranaque

Board Case No. 011-05

Jaime A. Sanchez, Petitioner

Page 8

...

CERTIFICATION

t SYLVIA HAZEL T. BISMONTE-BELTRAN, having been assigned as Hearing Officer to draft a Decision in GSIS Case No. 011-05 entitled '1n the Matter of Petition to Include Petitioner's Previous Years of Service In the Computation of his Retirement Benefits under R.A. No. 8291, jaime A. Sanchez, petitioner" hereby certify that the statement of facts herein stated and being presented before this Board is accurate and true, based on the records of the case, the pleadings and other documents submitted by the parties.

This certification is issued in compliance with Board Resolution No.

198-A adopted on September 15, 2004.

July 4 , 2014.

SYLVIA HAZEL BISMONTE­H aring Officer

u

BOARD MEETING NO. 13 24 JULY 2014

Page 22

RESOLUTION NO. 103

WHEREAS, Mr. Jaime A. Sanchez filed a Petition before the GSIS Board of Trustees on 22 July 2005, docketed as GSIS Board Case No. 011-05, raising the issue on whether or not his previous years of service, for which corresponding benefits were~

OFFICIAL COPY

u

BOARD MEETING NO. 13 24 JULY 2014

Page 23

paid, can be added to his subsequent services when he re-entered the government service on 2 September 1991 for purposes of retirement under R.A. No. 8291;

WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 30 of R.A. No. 8291, the GSIS has original and exclusive jurisdiction to settle any dispute arising from the application of the laws administered by the GSIS;

RESOLVED, to APPROVE and CONFIRM the Decision in GSIS Board Case No. 011-05, entitled In the Matter of Petition to Include Petitioner's Previous Years of Service in the Computation of his Retirement Benefits under R.A. No. 8291, Jaime A. Sanchez, Petitioner, the dispositive portion of which states:

"WHEREFORE, the petition is hereby DISMISSED for being moot and academic.

"SO ORDERED."

A copy of the Decision in GSIS Board Case No. 011-05 is attached and made an integral part of this Resolution.