Marina vs. Coa GR No. 185812 Jan. 13, 2015 Facts:: Chanroblesvirtuall
Uploaded by
Jessica PulgaMarina vs. Coa GR No. 185812 Jan. 13, 2015 Facts:: Chanroblesvirtuall
Uploaded by
Jessica PulgaMARINA vs.
COA
GR No. 185812
Jan. 13, 2015
FACTS:
This case involves the validity of the grant of allowance and incentives to the officers and
employees of petitioner Maritime Industry Authority. We revisit the interpretation and
application of Section 12 of the Compensation and Position Classification Act of
1989.chanroblesvirtuall
The Resident Auditor issued notices of disallowance on the allowances and incentives received
by the officers and employees of Maritime Industry Authority. The Legal and Adjudication Office
of the Commission on Audit upheld the notices of disallowance issued.The Commission on
Audit affirmed the notices of disallowance. Thus, this petition for certiorari was filed by
Maritime Industry Authority.
Petitioner Maritime Industry Authority Petitioner Maritime Industry Authority argues that the
allowances and incentives granted to its officers and employees are not integrated in the
standardized salary. It relies on the last clause of the first sentence of Section 12 of Republic Act
No. 6758.
Petitioner insists that a circular must be issued by the Department of Budget and Management
for a specific allowance to be deemed integrated in the standardized salary pursuant to Section
12 of Republic Act No. 6758. Petitioner argues that since the National Compensation Circular
No. 59, the circular issued by the Department of Budget and Management implementing
Section 12, was not published in the Official Gazette or any newspaper of general circulation,
there can be no allowance deemed integrated in the standardized salary rates.
Respondent Commission on Audit Petitioner interpreted RA 6758’s Section 12 differently. It
considers all allowances as deemed included in the standardized salary except those specifically
enumerated in Section 12 of Republic Act No. 6758. The issuance of a circular by the
Department of Budget and Management is necessary only for the grant of allowance other than
those enumerated under Section 12 of Republic Act No. 6758 in addition to the standardized
salary.
ISSUE: W/N the grant of allowances and benefits to the officers and employees of MARINA
constitute double compensation.
RULING: YES. The grant of allowances and benefits amounts to Double compensation
proscribed by Article IX(B), Section 8 of the 1987 Constitution.
Article IX(B), Section 8 of the 1987 Constitution provides:
Section 8. No elective or appointive public officer or employee shall receive
additional, double, or indirect compensation, unless specifically authorized by law, nor accept
without the consent of the Congress, any present, emolument, office, or title of any kind
from any foreign government.
Pensions or gratuities shall not be considered as additional, double, or indirect compensation.
Petitioner Maritime Industry Authority argues that the rule against double
compensation does not apply because National Compensation Circular No. 59 is
ineffectual due to its non-publication.
Respondent Commission on Audit counters that the disallowed allowances is
tantamount to additional compensation proscribed by Article IX(B), Section 8 of the 1987
Constitution. This is because these allowances are not authorized by law.
Republic Act No. 6758 deems all allowances and benefits received by government officials
and employees as incorporated in the standardized salary, unless excluded by law or an
issuance by the Department of Budget and Management. The integration of the benefits
and allowances is by legal fiction.
The disallowed benefits and allowances of petitioner Maritime Industry Authority’s officials
and employees were not excluded by law or an issuance by the Department of
Budget and Management. Thus, these were deemed already given to the officials
and employees when they received their basic salaries. Their receipt of the disallowed
benefits and allowances was tantamount to double compensation.
