$' Upreme !court: 3repubhc of Tbe
$' Upreme !court: 3repubhc of Tbe
$' Upreme !court: 3repubhc of Tbe
$'>upreme <!Court
;!flllan tla
SECOND DIVISION
DAISY B. PANGA-VEGA,
Respondent. Promulgated:
."JAN-·t T2021 ~
x ------------- --- --------------- ----------------- - -- - ------------------------------ -------x
RESOLUTION
M. LOPEZ, J.:
ANTECEDENTS
1
Rollo. 26-43.
Id. at 44-58; penned by Assoc iate Justice Eduardo B. Peral ta, Jr., with the concurrence of Assoc iate
Justices Francisco P. Acosta and Rodil V. Zalameda (now a Member of this Court).
3
Id. at 59-60.
Resolution 2 G.R. No. 228236
Women," on February 7-11, 14-18, and 21 -25, 2011 , but not to exceed two
months, to undergo hysterectomy. 4
4
Id. at 308.
5 ld.atll6-119.
6 Id. at 133 , 308.
7
I d. at 120.
8
Id. at 12 1-1 22.
9
Id. at 123.
10
Id. at 124.
11
Id. at 125- 128.
12 /d.at l46-l48.
13 Id. at 129-130.
14
/d.atl31-140.
15
Id. at I 98-207. The CSC Decision disposed as fo llows:
WHEREFORE, the appeal of Daisy 8. Panga- Vega, is hereby GRANTED. Accordingly,
the Resolution dated March I 0, 20 11 of House of Representatives Electora l Tribunal (HR.ET),
Quezon C ity, directing her to consu me her approved two (2) month s leave of absence, is SET
ASIDE. Panga-Vega should be paid back salaries and other benefits from March 7, 20 11 to
April 7, 20 11.
t
Quezon City. Id. at 207.
Resolution 3 G.R. No . 228236
rendered effective the day she reported back for work. On November 23,2012,
the HRET sought reconsideration, 16 but the CSC denied this in its Resolution 17
dated February 12, 2013.
On March 19, 2013, the HRET filed a Petition for Review 18 assailing
the foregoing Decision and Resolution of the CSC with the CA. On April 29,
2016, the CA dismissed the petition. 19 Adopting the CSC's findings, it ruled
Panga-Vega may opt not to consume the full leave she applied for upon her
submission of the medical certificate. It also held that nothing in RA No. 9710
precludes the suppletory application of the rules on maternity leave to the
special leave benefit under RA No. 9710. The HRET sought reconsideration,
but the CA denied this in its Resolution20 dated November 8, 2016. Hence,
this petition. 2 1
The HRET argues that the CSC should not have applied suppletorily
the rules on maternity leave to the special leave benefit under RA No. 9710.
It also contends that Panga-Vega did not sufficiently comply with the "CSC
Guidelines on the Availment of the Special Leave Benefits for Women Under
RA No. 9710" 22 (CSC Guidelines), warranting her return to work.
16
ld.at208-213.
17
Id. at 2 14-2 19. The CSC Resolution disposed as follows:
WH EREFORE, foregoing considered, the Motion for Reconsideration of Atty. Girlie I.
Salarda, Secretary, House of Representatives Electoral Tribunal ( HRET), Q uezon C ity, is
hereby DENIED. Accordi ngly, the Civil Service Commission (CSC) Decision No. 12-0676
dated October 9, 20 12 granting the appeal of Daisy B. Panga-Vega and setting as ide the
Resolution dated March I 0, 20 11 ofHR ET as well as directing the payment of her back salaries
and other benefits from March 7, 2011 to April 7, 2011, STANDS.
Quezon City. Id. at 2 19.
18
Id. at 220-248.
19
Id. at 44-58. The CA Decision disposed as fo llows:
WHEREFORE, in view of the foregoing premises, the instant Petition for Review is
hereby DISMISSED.
SO ORDERED. Id. at 57.
20
Id. at 59-60. The CA Resolution disposed as fo llows:
Accordingly, for lack of persuasive force, We hereby DENY petitioner's Motion fo r
Reconsideration from the Decision of April 29, 2016.
SO ORDERED. Id. at 60.
21
Id. at 26-43.
22 CSC Memorandum Circular No. '.25 (20 I 0).
t
23
Id. at 837-846.
Resolution 4 G.R. No. 228236
The HRET was created by virtue of Section (Sec.) 17, Article VI of the
1987 Philippine Constitution, which provides that the House of
Representatives shall have its own Electoral Tribunal that shall be the sole
judge of all contests relating to the election, returns, and qualifications of its
Members. As a recognized instrumentality of the Government, the Court, in a
catena of cases, exercised over it its expanded judicial power to include the
determination of "whether or not there has been a grave abuse of discretion
amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction on the part of any branch or
instrumentality of the Government." 24
I
Resolution 5 G.R. No. 228236
27
CONV ENTION ON TH E ELIMINATION OF' ALL FORMS OF DISCRIM INATION AGAINST
WOMEN, Art. 3.
28
1987 Constitution, Art. XIJI, Sec. 14.
29
RA No. 97 10 (2009), Sec. 2.
30
See AniFion v. Government Service lnsuranc:e System. G.R. No. l 904 10, April I0, 2019.
Resolution 6 G.R. No. 228236
The Court finds it just anci more in accord with the spirit and intent of
RA No. 9710 to suppletorily apply the rule on maternity leave to the special
leave benefit. Similar to the special leave benefit under RA No. 9710, a
maternity leave under the Omnibus Rules on Leave seeks to protect the health
and welfare of women, specifically of working mothers, as its primary
purpose is to afford them some measures of financial aid, and to grant them a
period of rest and recuperation in connection with their pregnancies. 3 1 The
special leave benefit should be liberally interpreted to support the female
employee so as to give her further means to afford her needs, may it be
gynecological, physical, or psychological, for a holistic recuperation. The
recovery period may be a trying time that she needs much assistance and
compassion to regain her overall wellness. Nothing in RA No. 9710 and the
CSC Guidelines bar this more humane interpretation of the provision on
special leave benefit.
Anent Panga-Vega's return to work, while RA No. 9710 and the CSC
Guidelines do not require that the entire special leave applied for be
consumed, certain conditions must be satisfied for its propriety.
31
CSC M emorandum Circular No. 41 ( 1998), Ruic I t9).
32
CSC Me morand urn C ircubr No. 25 (20 I 0), List of Surg ical Operatio ns for Gynecological Disorders,
p. 4.
33
CSC Memorandum C ircul ar No. 25 (20 I 0), Sec. 2.2. 1.
34
CSC Memorandum C ircularJ\io. 25 (.20 !0), Sec. 3.5.
35 Japson v. Civil Service Commission, 663 Phil. 665, 675 (201 1).
y
36
Encinas v. POI Agustin, .Jr., 709 Phil. 236, 26 i (20 13).
Resolution 7 G.R. No. 228236
SO ORDERED.
WE CONCUR:
ESTELA M. ~~~RNABE
Senior Ch;e_,f Justice
Chairperson
AM't.i~VTER
:4.ssociate Justice
JHOSE~OPEZ
Associate Justice
ATTESTATION
1 attest that the conclusions i::1 the above R,;;;'.,: o lution haJ been reached
in consultation before the case was assi~ned to the writer of the opinjon of the
Court's Division.
ESTELA M. ~~BERNABE
Associate Justice
Chairperson
Resolution 8 G.R. No. 228236
CERTIFICATION
Pursuant to Section 13, Article VIII of the Constitution and the Division
Chairperson's Attestation, I certify that the conclusions in the above
Resolution had been reached in consultation before the case was assigned to
the writer of the opinion of the Court's Division.