[G.R. No. 117618. March 29, 1996.

]
VIRGINIA MALINAO vs. HON. LUISITO REYES

FACTS

Virginia Malinao is Human Resource Manager III of Sta. Cruz, Marinduque. Respondent Mayor
filed a case against her in the Office of the Ombudsman for gross neglect of duty, inefficiency and
incompetence. While the case was pending, he appointed a replacement for petitioner. Petitioner then
filed an administrative case against respondent Mayor in the Sangguniang Panlalawigan of Marinduque,
charging him with abuse of authority and denial of due process.

In an executive session of the Sanggunian, a vote of 5-3 found respondent Mayor guilty of the
charge and imposed on him the penalty of one-month suspension, which decision was signed by only one
member, Rodrigo Sotto, who was also the Presiding Chairman of the Blue Ribbon Committee of the
Sangguniang Panlalawigan. As a result, respondent Mayor questioned said decision and alleged that since
only Sotto alone signed the decision it can only be considered as a recommendation of the Blue Ribbon
Committee and he was not bound by it. Respondent Mayor also sent a letter to the Secretary of the DILG
regarding the decision of the committee to which the Secretary opined that it does not appear to be in
accordance with Section 66 of the Local Government Code of 1991. On the other hand, petitioner sent a
letter to respondent Governor Reyes, demanding that the "Decision" suspending respondent Mayor from
office be implemented without further delay, but Reyes declined since he agreed with the opinion of the
Secretary. Thus, respondent Mayor was acquitted from the charges by the Sanggunian in a vote of 7-2.

ISSUE

Whether or not the "Decision" had become final and executory, for failure of respondent Mayor
to appeal, thus it was beyond the power of the Sanggunian to render another decision.

RULING

These contentions are without merit. What petitioner claims to be the "Decision" of the
Sangguniang Panlalawigan bore the signature of only one member (Rodrigo V. Sotto) who signed the
"Decision" as "Presiding Chairman, Blue Ribbon Committee, Sangguniang Panlalawigan.”

Contrary to petitioner's claim, what the minutes only show is that on August 12, 1994 the
Sanggunian took a vote on the administrative case of respondent Mayor and not that it then rendered a
decision as required by Section 66(a) of the Local Government Code (R.A. No. 7160) which provides as
follows:

Section 66. Form and Notice of Decision. — (a) The investigation of the case shall be
terminated within ninety (90) days from the start thereof. Within thirty (30) days after
the end of the investigation, the Office of the President or the sanggunian concerned shall
render a decision in writing stating clearly and distinctly the facts and the reasons for such
decision. Copies of said decision shall immediately be furnished the respondent and all
interested parties.

In order to render a decision in administrative cases involving elective local officials, the
decision of the Sanggunian must thus be "in writing stating clearly and distinctly the facts and the
reasons for such decision." What the Sanggunian, therefore, did on August 12, 1994 was not to
render a decision. Neither may the so-called "Decision" prepared by Sanggunian Member Rodrigo
V. Sotto on September 5, 1994 be regarded as the decision of the Sanggunian for lack of the
signatures of the requisite majority.