Republic of the Ph ilippines

@ttirs of tle $olirttor Generul

August 5, 2019

HON. GERARDO C. NOGRALES

Chairman
National Labor Relations Commission
Banawe cor. P. Florentino Sts.
1100 Quezon City

Attention: HON. GRACE M. VENUS

Presid i ng Com m issioner
NLRC, Fourth Division

Re: DBM v.
NLRC, et al.
Special Civil Action No. R-MNL-18-08153-SC

Dear Chairman Nograles:

This is in reference to the Order dated July 2,20191 issued by RTC

Manila, Branch 8 in the above-captioned case, which denied the Department
of Budget and Management's (DBM) Motion for Reconsideration dated March
18, 2019 and the Office of the Solicitor General's (OSG) Manifestation and
Motion with Entry of Appearance dated March 27, 2019.

The subject Order dismissed with finality the DBM's Declaratory Relief
petition for failure to exhaust the administrative remedies provided under
Presidential Decree No. 2422 and Executive Order No. 292.3

Mindful of the number of claims for survivorship benefits previously filed

by the surviving spouses of officials of the respondent agencies, which were
subsequently denied by the DBM, the OSG, as the respondent agencies'
counsel, advises the respondent agencies not to pursue an appeal against the

IAttached herewith as Annex "A."

2 Prescribing the Procedure for Administrative Settlement or Adjudication of Disputes, Claims and Controvemies
Between or Among Government Offices, Agencies and lnstrumentalities, including Govemment-Owned or
Controlled Corporations, and for Other Purposes.
3
Administrative Code of 1987.

OSG Etrilding, 134 Amorsolo st , l-egaspi village, Makati city, Philippines 1229 .Tel. Nos. (632) 988-1674 . Fax No. (632) 813-7552 . Website: www.osg.gov.ph
subject Order of the trial court but to strongly encourage/ if possible, the
claimants of survivorship benefits, who are the real parties in interest,4 to file
separate petitions for mandamus to pursue their claims.

Kindly inform our office of your agency's conformity to our

recommendation on or before August B,2Ol9.

Thank you.

Very truly yours,

EIHE JOS CAL A

S orG ral
ffi'ffi 0s6lrcoo?Y0Jq€l3{

. ANGELES
Assistant Solicitor General/Chief of Staff

. MADAMBA
Assista nt or General

REX B RDO L. PASCUAL

Assista n t Solicitor General

JOSEPH L. GUEVARRA
Assistant Solicitor General

I Section 2, Rule3 ofthe Rules ofCourt defines a real paxty in interest as a party who stands to be benefited or injured
by the judgment in the suit, or the party entitled to the avails ofthe suit. "lnteresl" refers to material interest, an interesr
in issue and to be affected by the decree as distinguished from mere interest in the question involved, or a mere
incidental interest.

2
 ill lilil1fl lllilMll[!Iulll1ll1li lll lil

POMPEYO OIAZ
Dollnrs Enirod I cho ANNEX "A''
ItI'PIIIILIC] OF TI{E PHILI PPINIiS OFFICE OF THE
NATIONAI, CAPIT'AL .ITJDICIAI, RE(;I0N soLrcrroR GENERAI-
I{E(;tONAt,'l'Rt AL COU RT I JUL 812010
I}RANCII 8 - MANII,A
D
fl&{toElrEllrt sEIn cE
DEPAITI'M!]N'I' OF BT]D(;I''I ANI) DOCXET

IT E PREStiNI'I.]I) I}\'
]\IA NA(; IIM EN'I'
H()N()t{At}t-u sl..CRF]'l'ARY
BIN.IAIIIN T.]. I)IOKNO. Special Ctivil Action No:
Petitioner, R-1\1N r.- r 8-081 53-S('

-vers lts- Firr: l)eclaraton Rclicf (Srction :l of

R.A. No.9916 in relalion to Seclion { of
NATIONAI, LAI}OR RELATIONS R.A. No. 93,17. Scclions I { antl 16 of
C()l!IMISSION. rel)rescnled b1- R.A. No. 10071, Scction 5 of I',1). 1529.
(]IIAIR}IAN CHII.ARIX) rusanrentlcd. anrl Section 39 ol'l{.A. No.
NOGIIALES. NA'I'IONAI, 9r36)
PROSECI"I'I'I0N SI]RVICIi.
represented by PROSI|CtITOIt
(;I,NIiRAI, RICHARD ANTHONY I).
FA DI..I LLON. LAND RE(; ISTIIATION
AtJl'll()RlTY, rcpresen(etl by
ADNIINIS'I'RAToIT RI]NA'I'() I).
BERNIIi.'O. T]NI'R(;Y
t{Ii(;tit.AToRY coMMtsst()N,
rcprescnletl b.v
CHAIRPERSON
AGNES VICEN"TA S. TORRES
D}]VANADERA.
Respontlenls.
t--------------------------------------------x

oRI)tilt
l;or rcsolution are (i) thc lVtotion fbr Reconsideralion filcd b1' petitioncr on f2
April 1019 praying that thc Order dated March I8. l0l 9 be reconsidercd and se1 aside.
and (ii) the Manilestation and Motion \\,ith Lntry t>f Appcarance filcd by the ()ljict' o{'
thc Solicitor General (OSG) daled l7 March l0l9 praying ibr thc rvithdrarval oi'its
Manil'cstation and Motion (in lie n ol' Cortrnrerrt) daled 25 Septernber l0l 8 and to
inlcrvcnc in lhc inslant casc-.

ln support ol'its Mo(ion. pctilioner raised the lbllowing arguments: (i) tl.re
nralter involvcs issues rvhich cannol be rclcrrcd to the Scc|ctar-r ol' Justice lbr
arhitration;1ii) thc rcsolution ol'lhc issue rnay necessarily involvc claims against tlrc
so\enlmcnt rvlrich cannol be thc subicct ol'arbitration and cirnnol be conrpronriscd:
(iii) the Secretary ol'Jr.rslice is the one rvhich endorses the clainr ol'tlie respondent
Natiorral Prosecution Service (NPS) and thus. rcfcrring lhe matler I'rrr arbitration
belirre its olilcc nright prcjudicre thc riglrt ol'thc petitioncr 1o a llir and inrpartial
decision and/or ruling: (iv) an interprctaliorr and application ol'the dill'eront statutes
vis-a-vis the exclusivitr o1'1hc intcnded bcneflciarics urrdcr Scctior.l 4 o{'RA No. 9946
 l] l: -tri c =5
='^<a aco9l". ==a::,--a.-
e
F= i'1
I
'-: ='r - '1 l. -.= - - ; -- c- ^l- -
=ar !.*7\.-., j
) 3 a- aa <- Li
":4 :;J:rJii l, . --: .. ='=4,
=a: a;c.-.i 4. <G'= -o7.2! -1 1-=v,a,';
; d = - , at - I=7,.',,-;
)=e^- = =. ,--=..:n -a l. ) 1. -
< v -, ;t -.i slJ F a < a =:'= :. ^ -,,
=-
't:4-d
,-:- =r-ai:'-.'-r:
;;--:-:: a)
=,= =' 2 aa.!
t)'? '='u =
! =' a .a'-nz
Crr = 1i: ., / \-a -
i ') Jr ., ! A 5'- ? r= i.,, i- ,a ', ^. -- t'.
=,!-='
? tJ ,- -, ;. I " \' .J = a =,2 =- .:
=. ara=1'-L'4, a C a t)
t', '. ^- - -. ^=a,- =.
18 -=.== ? ? =
a,=-7!-*,'
; 4= <
L t .: =_::. I i
*, C c. =;-- a!
!=a-.-
=a,t=,-
+'t;7-'c-?-
- !' c' ': ,c-1i ='ir.'-'
7-7 lJ,^
^=
-.!
a'1 - .^ \. = =.
,, a C-I - -
t) - ::.:.: ^. -

'33 j e jr:
-:,t.,= 'r..-=aL.i. )'- ! a
,v - 7_ -12t;.-=')^?- i!.-7:) -
- - \./ =.* : aJ-.- ;
;;;. . -'' -ltaL* ',\ = o- -n--l=
- =- -).- _0 na a-
, a-" aa
a1
t:=a - 1u,<b=- r.,aLi-l -. ;-. t!-, 7 ..
a
'
, -C- a-!==.1
a
-
a -{ .r a a I
9 t) c ; .,1
- - C
c-'., ) -- =
-: '.= o-.= =lJ\,/=
=
aa^.rF i c -.=
-
)!.=? 7.;i72-.; o x 1) ?-
!4tl=-'
t- I
= ^ll r; a
-: --.:. - i: \.. \:-=.=
- 1 ,< o '.: ; !r- - a >-.=--7.
'- -'A
I-tzz aY t? ! -/ i
; E A; X
-=.6,.';?'; .>=
9 e Cd- ar I * =.,a_5-i
?*r.A= :'tl"-''=4E c '^E=AL
.= = =i;?7.r
=.; =: ='+
j
='.;
_ 7. =rE =i =t
z- - ='
a
-.
Y
- -- a
,,
,...--.=.,<te-+ F9.t7; ,n^!1;-=
-,-!Q F- a-
==
' ? tJ-L; --..:i-z'n -
;- -1= ; 7
C"'c
o-=^la +=.> La9
= F
a ,, c-G
E ara - ^v
9- .-,;
= - t'a c,
- -::- -.
a, =
^ =a- a '- .a- ;, ,i ziz?=v
-^W=,
: =7=-,..'-l
aJ'=/a=- ).= F == o-
a 7":
=c,
=a.t--
*)a- = iq==8.7. - I - 7.' a =.
=:+=-.ra- r->P_' : '-A = ^=a
-- : ''
-=, --.
1 .- 4 ?;<. o=.-!.)a
=a .. :-; -'e- =
a - ^i: /-, *
,| !: 3 =.
3 -7=
i7 ia--'->c-
- == =-= - - .. -,8-a_ t.t
J- l'
-
=a'aa
-i _= a,z=, ".
a a .a=_ 1.'''ni7 j
,.. ;r'1 a5o-,
/..7 ='- =
G
c.
=.
,
-; ---
ca-?'r,!
_. )Y

;i ^-;.
- -''J
L?C2
.)--L
L a 4 ", -o - cf (, \-^*l l.-=-''u-
-:a - -'-
; - -
J.
='?
J e $. r
=1 -
",szo
=- I
?"a !-r ; t.

- -, l)a
',, a e=
=-

ft a Z'/
JV
.. 4
=
C
'?- o I0? ;-- :-.2 i i
 Pclitit)ner likcr.visc avcrs that ret'erring tl.ic rnatler to thc Sccretary ol .lustice
nri-rrht pre.judicc thc right ol petitioner to fair and impartial ruling considcring that lhe
Secretarl ol'Justice in its letter to petilioner daled June 15. 2017 lras endorsed the
clainr ol'respondent Nl)S lirr survivorship benelits. Asidc I'rorn thc lailurc o1'petitioner
1() attach the saicl lctter 10 any ol'its plcadings. a reading ot the citccl podion of Ihc
alleged lcttcr ol' the Sccrctary' ol' Juslicc dtx's not convinc'c this ('otrn to sustain
.l'hc
potitioner. anticipatccl reaction ol thc Secrctan' o1' Justice on tho instant
eontroversy is nrcrel;- thcolizcd. 'l lre possibility of his partialitv does nol avail to take
lhc prescnt action out ol'the realrr ol lhe sLrneal and nrclely imagincd. As such.
granting thc said lctter exists. the lacl that tlrcre u'as alrcadl,an cnd()r'scrnent lionr thc
Sccrctan' ol'Justice to the petitioner is of'no mornent. thc sanrc docs not cxempl tlrc
instanl casc liorn thc ooverage ol' I'D 2,11.

On pctitiont-r's contcntion lhat the present controversy is not covercd by ['D

142 as thr.' rcsolution ol'thc prescnt action will inevitabll. af'fect lhe right o{'private
citizens. i.e. the survivor spouses ol"lhe qualilled deceased ollicials and cnrployees of
the respondcnt agencies. this Clourt is not convinced. While it mav be lruc that any
application and intcrprctation ol'lhe cxclusivity provision under Section 4 ol-t{A 994(r
nray havc rr'percussions to thenl, this cloes not renrove this case lionr thc arrrbit of l)D
)t_)

l:or rlne. petitioncr has nol shown that the alleged survivorship bcneliciaries ol
respondent NLRC have vested right to be consiclcred indispensablc party to this
aclion. 'l he instanl motion likcwist: nriserahly failed to allegc un e risting r()r]trl)vrrs\
or clispute bctwcen pctitioner ancl the said benellciarics.

It is $orth noting thal tbr the instanl:rctiorl to plosper betu,een thc said parlies.
therc inusl be a.iusticiable controvsrsy. A.iusticiablc cor')tr()vcrsy rclcrs to an existing
casc or cc,ntrovcrsy thirt is appropriatc or ripc lbr.judicial detcrniination. not olrc tlrat
is coniectural or m!-rely anticipalor1.! ln tl.tis case, asidc liorn pctiliolcr's allc,gation
that the alleged survivorship lreneliciarics ol'r'cspr:ndent Nt.t{(' rvill incvitablv bt:
afl'ectetl b_v any pronounccrncnt this court will rcnder. no ollter evidelrce rvas proli'ercd
by petitioner. antl cven rcspondenl NL-RC. to demonslrals {hat the riuhts ol'these
survivorship bcneliciaries havc becn actually iniured. nor did it sLrllicientl;'slate whal
specilic legal right ol' the said bcnellciaries rvas violrted by pctitioncr'. and what
pafticular acl or acts of thc latter rvere in breach ol' their rights. thc law or the
(.'onstitution. 'l hc above gcncral avcnnerrt of petitioner does ntll sulilcc to constitutc a
legal right or inltrcst, nor constitulc a.justiciable conlruvers)'. lt is a tirnc-honorod rule
that sheer spccultition cloes rrot give rise to an actionable risht.l

It is settlcd that this ('our1 lras exclusive juriscliction ovcr a Pctition lbr
I)eclaratory' Ilclicl' as in thc irrstant case. the renrcd"v.' being sought is judicial
"thc
detennination or construction iirising lnrm the intr-rprctation ol-Section .1r ol'RA No.
99.{(r concerning thc exclusivitl, provision o1'thc berre'ilts irttrt.iduced r,rnclcl said law.
While this is truc. horvever, l't) 241 provides that all disputcs and chinrs .rolc/r'

Rupulrlicotthr l'hilinlil(\vr. llerrinio llarr) lloque.cl al. l(j.R.No. l0{6i)a- ScDletlrber:.l. l0ll l
rllrorhcr
Mlri no "Vike" Vclardc vs. Sl)ciul lrsticc Sociur\ I(;. R. No. l5t).i)7 - April 18. :o().11
'seclion 1 I$o (-l) n0* scctiolls arc herch] insened in RcFLrblic Act No.910, ii\ an).r]dcd. to |cad a! Sccli{rr j - A
uld Sccti(nr I - ll. \r\ "Sll(' I - A. All pcnsio,r l)e !lits ol'rLtircd ldrnb.r\ ol thr .lu.liciilr) \hall he
aut(,mirtical!) i,lcreased when0!cr lhcre ir nn irrcreasc in thr \iilary {)l lhc :rrnc poriti(rr lionr which he/sh(
rel ira(l "
betwccn goveflrn'lenl itgencies and t.rtlices, including govcrnmcrlt-owncd or
ctlnttollcd corporalions. shall bo adnr in istrat ivcly seltled or adludicated hy the
Sccrctar) of Justicc, thc Solicitor (-icneral- or thc (lolc'nrrncnt (.'orporurte ('ounsel.
depcnding on tht- issues and governmenl auencies inlolvcd. z\s rcgarcls cascs
involving only qu,,:stions of law. it is thc Sccrctary of .lustice g'ho has .jurisdiction('.
Here. it is undispLrted tlrat petitioncr and respondcnts all belong to thc cxecutivc
hranch ol'the governnlent and the controversy raised. the inlerpletation ol'Sestion 4 ol'
RA 99.1(r. is a rluestion ol'law whieh clearll lalls within the provision ol-l'D 241.

[.]nder the doclrine ol exhaustion ol' adm inislrative rcrnedics. it is nrandated that
rvhcre a remedy belbre an adnrinistralivc body is provided by statutc. relicl'nrusl be
sought by exhausting this rernedy- prior ro bringing an aclion in court in order to give
the aclrn inistrat ive bodl' cver)' oppo(unity to decide a mltter that corllcs *'ithin its
iurisdiction. a litigant cannot go to court without llrst pursuing his adnrinistrative
remediesl otherwise, his action is prematute and his case is not ripe lbr.iudicial
detcrnr inat ion.'" PD 212. provides lbr such adrrr in istrativc rcntedy.
'l'ltus. only aticr thc
Presidenl has deciticd the dispute bct\\'!'en govemrnont olfices and asencics can the
aggrieved party reson lo the courts. il'it so desires. Olherwisc. il resort l.() the courts
rvoultl be prcmaturs lirr l}ilure to exhaust administrativc lerretlies. Non-observancc ol'
the doctrinc of'cxhaustion r:f adrninistrative rerncdies would rcsLrlt in lack ol'cause o1'
aclion. which is onc ol'thc urounds lirr <iismissal ol'a cornplaint.s

-l
hus. in thc Ordcr dtrted itt March 1019. this C'ourt disnrisscd rl.rc instant
l)etition {br lack ol "jurisdiction and lor failure to exhaust administrative remcdics
proviiled under PD 1,12 and tO 292.

Corollary thcrcto. the lVlanifeslalion and lvlotion rvith [intry'ol'Appearance liled

by the OSG dated l7 N'krch l0l9 praying lor the rvithdrawiil ol its NIan ilcsrirtiorr and
ll{otion (ir /rcr ol'(lonrnrsnt) datod 25 Scplem[rer ]0l8 and to intervcne in thc instant
cusc i: likcu isc dcnied frrl hcing rrroot.

WHIIREF-ORE. premises considcred, thr N4otion for Rcconsidcration liled by

the petitioncr dated I 8 March 201 9and the Manile station and Motion rvith I:-ntry of
Appearancc lilcd hy thc OS(i dated 17 lVlarch l0l9 are he rehv DllNllil).

so oR.DLtiED.

1 .luly' 1019. Manila. ['hilippines

(]YNAITA IIANNA}I I,. CAYTON

l'rcsiding.ludge

"P: \l M \\. ( lR r(t.R. No. trrSl{h) l/\u.-u\r lt. -r0t7l

[\4url Jerornc S Mnqlirhng. \\ l,hrlrlpifle n muscnte {!td (;anling (.orpomlir)n (l}A(i('()R) ns represcnlc hyits
rncr,nlh. t ('lr.lirnliur I liarnr(rt.nrrrrrr, l(;R \(,. l()t)5ti6t)(.(rnhcrll.:0lil
rMariuhu(; I'jerrr.r
lle.rrr Ilcnr\ L Nlcrlo and ljrrvin V.fllDr.it.l(.R No l6l l09. Jtrn|lan 22. ]0 l.l
l