This case has been cited 1 times or more.
|
2002-02-27 |
QUISUMBING, J. |
||||
| As held previously, participation by parties in the administrative proceedings without raising any objection thereto bars them from raising any jurisdictional infirmity after an adverse decision is rendered against them.[22] In the case at bar, petitioner raised the issue of lack of jurisdiction for the first time in his amended petition for review[23] before the CA. He did not raise this matter in his Motion to Dismiss[24] filed before the CSC Regional Office. Notably, in his Counter-Affidavit, he himself invoked the jurisdiction of the Commission by stating that he was "open to further investigation by the CSC to bring light to the matter"[25] and by further praying for "any remedy or judgment which under the premises are just and equitable."[26] It is an undesirable practice of a party participating in the proceedings, submitting his case for decision, and then accepting the judgment only if favorable, but attacking it for lack of jurisdiction, when adverse.[27] | |||||