Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

SARAH P. AMPONG v. CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION

This case has been cited 7 times or more.

	GR No. 197307 2014-02-26	FLOR GUPILAN-AGUILAR v. OFFICE OF OMBUDSMAN VELASCO JR., J.
"fn">[42] It is a malevolent act that puts serious doubt upon one's ability to perform duties with the integrity and uprightness demanded of a public officer or employee.[43] The inculpatory allegations in the controversy, if proved, qualify as acts of dishonesty that would merit dismissal from service. The requirement of filing a SALN is enshrined, as it were, in the Constitution[44] to promote transparency in the civil
	AM No. P-08-2531 2013-04-11	CIVIL COMMISSION v. MERLE RAMONEDA-PITA PER CURIAM
In support of its conclusion, the OCA cited Ampong v. Civil Service Commission, CSC-Regional Office No. 11[18] among others. Said the OCA: The standard procedure is for the CSC to bring its complaint against a judicial employee before the Supreme Court through the OCA as shown in several cases. The Court, however, has made exceptions in certain cases. In the very recent case of Ampong, the Court, although it declared that it had administrative jurisdiction over the petitioner, nevertheless upheld the ruling of the CSC based on the principle of estoppel. In the said case, petitioner Ampong, a court interpreter at the time the CSC instituted administrative proceedings against her, questioned the jurisdiction of the CSC after it found her guilty of dishonesty in surreptitiously taking the CSC-supervised Professional Board Examination for Teachers (PBET) in 1991 in place of another person and dismissed her from the service. The Court denied the petition on the ground that the previous actions of petitioner estopped her from attacking the jurisdiction of the CSC which had accorded her due process.[19] (Citations omitted.)
	GR No. 179054 2012-09-05	BAGONG KAPISANAN SA PUNTA TENEMENT v. AZER E. DOLOT MENDOZA, J.
Dishonesty is defined as the disposition to lie, cheat, deceive, or defraud; untrustworthiness; lack of integrity; lack of honesty, probity or integrity in principle; lack of fairness and straightforwardness; disposition to defraud, deceive or betray.[20]
	GR No. 183890 2011-04-13	OFFICE OF OMBUDSMAN v. MANUEL P. VALENCIA MENDOZA, J.
On the other hand, Dishonesty is incurred when an individual intentionally makes a false statement of any material fact, practicing or attempting to practice any deception or fraud in order to secure his examination, registration, appointment, or promotion.[37] It is understood to imply the disposition to lie, cheat, deceive, or defraud; untrustworthiness; lack of integrity; lack of honesty, probity or integrity in principle; lack of fairness and straightforwardness; the disposition to defraud, deceive or betray.[38] It is a malevolent act that puts serious doubt upon one's ability to perform his duties with the integrity and uprightness demanded of a public officer or employee.[39] Like the offense of Unexplained Wealth, Section 52 (A)(1), Rule IV of the Revised Uniform Rules on Administrative Cases in Civil Service treats Dishonesty as a grave offense, the penalty of which is dismissal from the service at the first infraction.
	GR No. 185685 2011-01-31	OFFICE OF OMBUDSMAN v. NIETO A. RACHO MENDOZA, J.
Dishonesty begins when an individual intentionally makes a false statement in any material fact, or practicing or attempting to practice any deception or fraud in order to secure his examination, registration, appointment or promotion.[51] It is understood to imply the disposition to lie, cheat, deceive, or defraud; untrustworthiness; lack of integrity; lack of honesty, probity or integrity in principle; lack of fairness and straightforwardness; disposition to defraud, deceive or betray.[52] It is a malevolent act that puts serious doubt upon one's ability to perform his duties with the integrity and uprightness demanded of a public officer or employee.[53] Section 52 (A)(1), Rule IV of the Revised Uniform Rules on Administrative Cases in Civil Service treats dishonesty as a grave offense the penalty of which is dismissal from the service at the first infraction.[54]
	GR No. 175115 2009-12-23	LILY O. ORBASE v. OFFICE OF OMBUDSMAN PERALTA, J.
Dishonesty has been defined as the disposition to lie, cheat, deceive, or defraud; untrustworthiness; lack of integrity; lack of honesty, probity or integrity in principle; lack of fairness and straightforwardness; disposition to defraud, deceive or betray.[36] Based on the foregoing, this misleading act of petitioner clearly constitutes dishonesty. Under Section 52, Rule IV of the Uniform Rules on Administrative Cases in the Civil Service, dishonesty is classified as a grave offense punishable by dismissal even for the first offense. Thus, as provided by law, no other penalty is imposable against the petitioner but dismissal.
	GR No. 185749 2009-12-16	CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION v. HERMINIGILDO L. ANDAL CARPIO, J.
By virtue of this power, it is only the Supreme Court that can oversee the judges' and court personnel's administrative compliance with all laws, rules and regulations. No other branch of government may intrude into this power, without running afoul of the doctrine of separation of powers. This we have ruled in Maceda v. Vasquez[10] and have reiterated in the case of Ampong v. Civil Service Commission.[11] In Ampong, we also emphasized that in case of violation of the Civil Service Law by a court personnel, the standard procedure is for the CSC to bring its complaint against a judicial employee before the Office of the Court Administrator of the Supreme Court.