REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES

COURT OF APPEALS
MANILA

ANNIE G. ARCALA,
Petitioner,

-versus- CA-G.R. SP NO. 129388

For: Petition for Review (CSC
Case No. D-10-200 based on
the Formal Charge/Decision
No. 11-0121) with Prayer for
Preliminary Injunction and/or
Temporary Restraining Order

CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION,

Respondent.
X - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -x

SUPPLEMENTAL MOTION
(TO THE MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION)

COMES NOW, Petitioner Annie G. Arcala, through

undersigned counsel, unto this Most Honorable Court, most
respectfully avers that:

1. On 03 June 2013, the office of the petitioner’s counsel

received a copy of the Resolution, rendered by this Honorable
Court, promulgated on May 24, 2013, denying petitioner’s prayer
for the issuance of preliminary injunction and/or temporary
restraining order.

2. In the aforesaid Resolution, this Most Honorable Court,

aside from denying petitioner’s prayer for the issuance of
preliminary injunction and/or temporary restraining order, also
stated as follows:
“xxx xxx xxx
“Before giving due course to the petition, the defendant is
required to file a comment thereon (not a motion to dismiss) within 10
days from notice of this resolution. Petitioner may thereafter file a reply
within 5 days from receipt of said comment.
“Upon submission of the aforesaid pleadings or the expiration of
the period for filing the same, the petition will be deemed submitted for

1
 decision, unless the parties are required to file their respective
memoranda.

3. On 08 July 2013, the defendant Civil Service Commission

filed a Motion for Extension of Time To File Comment asking that
an extension of thirty (30) days be granted from 08 July 2013 or
until 07 August 2013 within which to file the required Comment.

4. Again, on 02 August 2013, the defendant Civil Service

Commission filed a Motion for Extension of Time To File Comment
ratiocinating that because of voluminous records of the instant
case, it prayed that another extension of fifteen (15) days be
granted from 07 August 2013 or until 22 August 2013 within
which to file the required Comment.

5. Until now, no Comment yet was filed by the said

defendant which should prompt this Most Honorable Court to
declare the said defendant in default and that it has waived its
right to controvert the evidence brought forth by the petitioner in
this case. After granting the petitioner’s prayer for the issuance of
preliminary injunction and/or temporary restraining order, this
Most Honorable Court can, thus, submit the petition for decision.

6. We beg the indulgence of this Most Honorable Court to

delve into account the material facts that had It so considered
would have granted the said application for injunctive relief
and/or temporary restraining order. Petitioner, through counsel,
had filed before this Honorable Court her Motion for
Reconsideration last 17 June 2013. It has been more than three
(3) months already and just because of the intentional delay
caused by the defendant Civil Service Commission in filing
extensions of time, it redounded to an injustice caused to the
petitioner. As immortalized by the great Martin Luther King Jr. in
his Letter from Birmingham Jail, “justice too long delayed is
justice denied.”

7. In her Motion for Reconsideration, petitioner implores this

Court to be more circumspect in evaluating the records. The fallo
shows that an anonymous complaint which came from an
unknown complainant who hides under the email address
“general.aguinaldo@yahoo.com” was filed before the Civil Service
Commission. Based on the CSC Decision, promulgated 11
March 2011, 1st paragraph, No. 1 summation of allegations,
the Civil Service Commission already ruled that such accusation
does not constitute an offense of Grave Misconduct which falls
under “improper or illegal solicitation” because Petitioner Annie G.
Arcala HAD ASKED FOR FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE FROM THE
LOCAL GOVERNMENT OF TRECE MARTIRES, CAVITE, in the
amount of FIVE THOUSAND PESOS (P5,000.00) allegedly for the

2
orientation of PROCTAD Volunteers and that such amount was
given via check issued in the name of Director Alcala.

8. Similarly, this Most Honorable Court of Appeals, Fifteenth

Division further took note in its Resolution, dated May 24, 2013,
that the other initial charges against the petitioner, such as,
“grave misconduct” and “conduct prejudicial to the best interest of
the service” were earlier dismissed against her. Now, the Civil
Service Commission would suspend the petitioner from work by
finding her guilty of “conduct prejudicial to the best interest of the
service”, the very same offense dismissed earlier by the same
Honorable Commission. In other words, in the execution of the
CSC Decision, there will indeed be grave injustice and irreparable
injury to the petitioner which would immerse her if implemented
to pain and anguish as such action is one of the things that keep
impunity in place and would make a mockery of her constitutional
rights to due process of law and the administration of justice.

9. For better illumination, the petitioner lays down the

unfudged facts as follows:

MATERIAL OPERATIVE FACTS OF THE CASE

1. To begin with, the controversy at hand stems from two (2)

electronic mails or e-mails made by one “Remelie Ustare” with email
address at “eyie68@yahoo.com” and another by “General Aguinaldo”
with email address at “general.aguinaldo@yahoo.com” sent to
Commissioner Mary Ann Z. Fernandez-Mendoza imputing and alleging
numerous improper conduct committed by Director Annie G. Arcala.
2. Said email complaints were forwarded to the CSC Regional
IV, Cavite City wherein Director Lydia A. Castillo, Director IV, CSCFO,
Cavite issued a Memorandum, dated October 29, 2009, addressed to
Petitioner Annie G. Arcala ordering the latter to submit a Comment
thereto.
3. For her part, Petitioner Annie G. Arcala commented on the
aforesaid directive of Director IV Lydia A. Castillo on December 29,
2009 and filed an addendum thereto on April 28, 2010.
4. The Honorable Civil Service Commission dismissed the
accusations hurled by “Remelie Ustare” against Petitioner Annie G.
Arcala but unfortunately sustained the accusation of “General
Aguinaldo” as to the “improper or illegal soliciting” allegedly made by
Petitioner Arcala in its Resolution in CSC Case No. 110121 promulgated
on March 11, 2011. The Civil Service Commission even formally
charged her with such administrative offense.
5. It must be known that the idea to solicit financial assistance
from the Trece Martirez City Government was from Director Luy, the
cluster head of the Examination Division in Region IV. The applicants for
the Civil Service Examination last July 26, 2009 which was conducted in
Cavite was more than Three Thousand (3,000) which means that
Petitioner Arcala had deposited to the CSC Trust Fund more than One
Million Pesos (P1,000,000.00). However, the decision to solicit was

3
 prompted by the insufficient amount received by her Field Office for the
conduct of the two day Professional Corps of Test Administrators
(PROCTAD) orientation seminar-workshop last July 23 and 24, 2009. A
Budget Proposal was submitted by Roland D. Palumpon, OIC
Examination Service Division wherein he estimated that the number of
participants would be 258 with six (6) facilitators to be served lunch and
snacks totalling 266 persons. At a P100.00 food price for each person it
would total P26,600.00, which amount was received from the Regional
Office of Region IV. This does not include the honorarium of resource
person, contingencies and other miscellaneous expenses which would
be estimated to total in the amount of P32,100.00. Thus, Petitioner
Arcala had no choice but to avail of such assistance of Five Thousand
Pesos (P5,000.00) from the Trece Martires City.
6. On July 02, 2009, Petitioner Annie G. Arcala wrote a letter
addressed to former mayor Hon. Melencio L. De Sagun of Trece
Martires City requesting for financial assistance in meeting with the
various expenses that would be incurred by her CSC, Region 4 Office in
the conduct of the PROCTAD seminar-workshop on July 23 and 24,
2009 like serving lunch and snacks and other miscellaneous and
necessary expenses prior to the administration of the Career Service
Examination – Paper and Pencil Test (CSE-PPT) held on July 26, 2009
at various Public High Schools and Elementary Schools in Trece
Martires City.
7. Such request for monetary assistance from the Trece Martires
City government was prompted by the exigency of the situation and it
was made in good faith upon the suggestion of Director Luy. The City
Government of Trece Martires GRATUITOUSLY GAVE the said
pecuniary aid. It is also assured that the amount given by Trece Martires
City was all spent where it was intended, for the good and best interest
of the service. All the receipts were acknowledged by Ms. LUCY
SAGUN, the Human Resources Management Officer of Trece Martires
City.
8. Although the money was in check and in the name of
Petitioner Annie G. Arcala but not in her account, it was a mere
oversight considering the urgency of the situation and to facilitate easy
encashment.
9. Moreover, such request for financial assistance made by
Petitioner Arcala from the local city government was coursed through
proper intermediaries in accordance with laws, memoranda of
agreements and legal procedures. It does not also cause undue injury to
anyone and neither did Petitioner Arcala obtain any personal gain or
advantage, which is what the law punishes. Neither does the P5,000.00
legally approved financial assistance from the city government constitute
a “gift, gratuity, favor, entertainment, loan or anything of monetary value”
nor does it affect the functions of her office. It is again reiterated that
such request was to augment the budget for the seminar workshop for
the CSE-PPT held on July 23-24, 2009 and the receipt of the said
financial assistance was acknowledged by Ms. Lucy Sagun, the HRMO
of Trece Martires City government.

10. Petitioner Annie G. Arcala sees nothing wrongful nor

unlawful in requesting for financial assistance from the Trece
Martires City Government when the reason for asking the same is
IN GOOD FAITH for the purpose of augmenting the budget for
seminar workshop of CSE-PPT held on July 23-24. Good faith is

4
understood as an intangible and abstract quality with no technical
meaning or statutory definition, and it encompasses, among other
things, an honest belief, the absence of malice and the
absence of design to defraud or to seek an unconscionable
advantage. An individual’s personal good faith is a concept of
his own mind and, therefore, may not conclusively be
determined by his protestations alone. It implies honesty of
intention, and freedom from knowledge of circumstances which
ought to put the holder upon inquiry. The essence of good faith
lies in an honest belief in the validity of one’s right, ignorance of a
superior claim, and absence of intention to overreach another.
(PNB vs. De Jesus, 458 Phil. 454, 2003)
11. Petitioner Arcala’s conduct or act of requesting for
financial assistance from the City Government of Trece Martires
falls within the exacting norms of public office and most especially
in preserving the image of the Civil Service Commission in which
she is presently a public servant. She, however, most laments the
audacity and impudence of the unknown complainant “General
Aguinaldo” who maliciously, insultingly and slanderously hurled
unsubstantiated and untruthful accusations against her and
sullying her good name and reputation. Petitioner Arcala has been
discharging the functions of her position and has never been
found to have misused any amount entrusted to her.
12. The Honorable Civil Service Commission, in Its
challenged Decision, formally charged Petitioner Annie G. Arcala
of Grave Misconduct due to such so-called “improper solicitation”.
Nonetheless, this Most Honorable Court of Appeals should
similarly be guided by the Certification issued by former Mayor
Melencio L. De Sagun, Jr. of Trece Martires City. In the said
Certification, said previous mayor attested that the financial
assistance approved by him in July 2009 in the amount of Five
Thousand Pesos (P5,000.00) for Petitioner Arcala (which comes
from the city’s miscellaneous account and not required to
liquidate since it was not a cash advance) was a SHOW OF
SUPPORT to the said Petitioner’s various programs and projects
which also brought benefits to Trece Martires and other agencies.
13. Aside from this, the Honorable Supreme Court of the
Philippines in the case of Landrito vs. Civil Service
Commission, 223 SCRA 564 and as reiterated in Civil Service
Commission vs. Jose J. Lucas, G.R. No. 127838, January 21,
1999 ruled that in grave misconduct involving any of the
additional elements of corruption, clear or willful intent to violate
the law or flagrant disregard of established rule must be manifest.
14. This is obviously lacking in petitioner’s case considering
that what was involved was a request for financial assistance of
P5,000.00 made by Director Arcala to the City Government of

5
Trece Martires, which was gratuitously granted by the latter.
Surely, there is no intent to violate any law if such request was
coursed through the proper legal forum. Such allegation by the
unidentified accuser was not even established by substantial
evidence.
15. For the benefit of discussion without conceding, if the
serious offense of Grave Misconduct leveled by the Honorable Civil
Service Commission against Petitioner Alcala connotes
Corruption, it must consist in the act of an official or fiduciary
person who unlawfully uses his station or character to procure
some benefit for himself or for another person, contrary to duty
and the rights of others. In the case of Petitioner Arcala, no such
thing or similar import can be gleaned from her act of asking for
financial assistance from the said local government. Her actuation
was within the mandate of the law, without deriving personal gain
or benefit therefrom but for a good purpose and best interest of
the service, that is, to augment the budget for the seminar
workshop for the CSE-PPT last July 23-24, 2009.

16. Cogito ergo sum, as the defendant Civil Service

Commission failed to challenge the evidence adduced by the
petitioner thereby constituting a waiver on their part to present
evidence and the fact that there is clearly grave abuse of
discretion committed by the said defendant, it goes to show that
grave injustice and irreparable injury would be committed against
the Petitioner if such very harsh penalty of Suspension of Six (6)
months and One (1) day would be implemented against her. The
senses of urgency and necessity are truly present in this case
which would clearly make room for the issuance of an injunctive
writ in favor of the petitioner. Petitioner Annie G. Arcala is, thus,
entitled to the relief demanded, and part of such relief consists
in restraining the Honorable Civil Service Commission from
enforcing its questioned decision and resolution during the
pendency of the action, considering that the constitutional right to
Due Process of the Petitioner was absolutely violated and the
continuance of the act or acts complained of during the litigation
would absolutely work injustice to petitioner.

Hence, it is of utmost importance that an injunction be

issued in view of the foregoing just and meritorious grounds
raised and discussed above.
Petitioner is ready and willing to post a bond executed to the
party or person enjoined, in an amount to be fixed by the court,
to the effect that the petitioner will pay to such party or person all
damages which it may sustain by reason of the injunction or tem-
porary restraining order if the court should finally decide that the
applicant was not entitled thereto.

6
 PRAYER
WHEREFORE, premises considered, it is most respectfully
prayed unto this Honorable Court:

That after due proceedings, the Resolution of this Most

Honorable Court, Fifteenth Division, dated May 24, 2013 be
reconsidered and/or set aside and consequently, a writ of
preliminary injunction and/or a Temporary Restraining Order be
issued, restraining the Honorable Civil Service Commission from
enforcing the assailed decision and resolution during the
pendency of the case, upon such bond as this Honorable Court
may reasonably fix.

Judgment must also be rendered:

Declaring the defendant Civil Service Commission to have

defaulted in controverting the evidence presented by the petitioner
in this case and thus, issuing an Order pronouncing that the
petitioner has waived its right to present evidence and counter-
statements against the instant petition.

Setting aside and nullifying the decision and resolution of

the Civil Service Commission for violating the constitutional rights
of the Petitioner and another one rendered, finding Petitioner NOT
Guilty of the offense- Conduct Prejudicial to the Best Interest to
the Service.

Making the writ of preliminary injunction that may be

issued, permanent.

Such other reliefs or remedies as may be just and equitable

in the premises are prayed for.

Indang, Cavite for the City of Manila, ____ September 2013.

JOHN IGGY G. PALLERA

Counsel for Petitioner Annie G. Arcala
Attorney’s Roll Number: 50856
IBP Lifetime Number: 08539
PTR Number: 2972116/ 15 January 2013/ Imus, Cavite
MCLE Exemption Number: III-001347
2nd floor, Unit E,
ELMIA Development, Inc. Bldg.,
San Gregorio Street, Indang, Cavite
Telephone Number: (0920)-9529682
Email address: attypallera@gmail.com
COPY FURNISHED:

7
Ms. MELANIA dB. GUANZON
Prosecutor
Atty. JAMAHLIN D. LACANDAZO-ESCALONA
Attorney V
Civil Service Commission
Office for Legal Affairs
Constitution Hills, Batasang Pambansa Complex,
Diliman, Quezon City

Hon. FRANCISCO T. DUQUE III

Chairman
Hon. ROBERT S. MARTINEZ
Commissioner
Atty. KRUNIMAR ANTONIO D. ESCUDERO III
Hearing Officer
Civil Service Commission
Constitution Hills, Batasang Pambansa Complex,
Diliman, Quezon City

EXPLANATION
(Pursuant to Section 11, Rule 13 of the Revised Rules of Court)
The foregoing pleading is being served by registered mail to the above-
named parties, personal service not being practicable due to time constraints
and lack of messengerial personnel in the office of the undersigned counsel.

JOHN IGGY G. PALLERA