Allarde vs.

Commission on Audit et al
G.R. No. 103578
January 29, 1993
Griño-Aquino, J.

FACTS:
Rodolfo T. Allarde, a former judge, applied for re�rement under Republic Act No. 910, which was approved. The
dispute arose when the Government Service Insurance System (GSIS) included a lump sum represen�ng his
allowance from the Municipality of Mun�nlupa in his re�rement pay. The Municipality had allocated this amount
for him through a resolu�on.

However, the Metro Manila Authority denied this addi�onal re�rement benefit, ci�ng a ruling by the Commission
on Audit (COA) sta�ng that such allowances should not be considered as part of re�rement benefit calcula�ons.

Allarde filed a claim with the COA, but it was denied. He sought reconsidera�on, but the COA upheld its denial.

ISSUE:
Whether or not the monthly allowance that the pe��oner had been receiving from the Municipality of Mun�nlupa
should be included in the computa�on of his re�rement benefits under Republic Act No. 910, as amended by
Presiden�al Decree No. 1438.

RULING:
No. It is an elementary principle of statutory construc�on that where the words and phrases of a statute are not
obscure or ambiguous, the meaning and inten�on of the legislature should be determined from the language
employed, and where there is no ambiguity in the words, there is no room for construc�on.

Accordingly, the provisions of Sec�on 3, P.D. No. 1438, which are clear and unambiguous, should be given their
plain and natural meaning. Inasmuch as the law limits the computa�on of the lump sum of 5 years' gratuity to "the
highest monthly salary plus the highest monthly aggregate of transporta�on, living and representa�on allowances
that the judge was receiving on the date of his re�rement," it is understood that other allowances are excluded.
Inclusio unius est exclusio alterius.

Finding no grave abuse of discre�on in the decision of the Commission on Audit, the pe��on for review is hereby
DISMISSED.