#12 MATIAS, Michelle Dulce Candelaria

PAT-OG VS CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION

G.R. NO. 198755
JUN. 5, 2013

DOCTRINE: CONCURRENT JURISDICTION Concurrent jurisdiction is that which is possessed over the same parties or
subject matter at the same time by two or more separate tribunals. Where concurrent jurisdiction exists in several
tribunals, the body that first takes cognizance of the complaint shall exercise jurisdiction to the exclusion of others.

FACTS: On Sept. 13, 2003, Bang-on, then a 14-year-old second year school student of Antadao National High School in
Sagada, Mountain Province, filed an affidavit of complaint against Pat-og, a third year high school teacher of the same
school, before the CSC Cordillera Adm. Region.

Bang-on alleged that on the morning of Aug. 26, 2003, he attended his class at the basketball court of the school,
where Pat-og and his third year students were holding a separate class, that he and some of his classmates joined Pat-
ogs third year students who were practicing basketball shots. Bang-on was not able to follow an instruction on falling in
line and was punched by Pat-og. As a result, he suffered stomach pain for several days and was confined in a hospital
from Sept. 10-12, 2003, as evidenced by a medico-legal certificate, which stated that he sustained a contusion hematoma
in the hypogastric area.

Taking cognizance of the administrative case, the CSC-CAR directed Pat-og to file a counter-affidavit. He denied
the charges hurled against him. On June 1, 2004, the CSC-CAR found the existence of a prima facie case for misconduct
and formally charged Pat-og.While the proceedings of the administrative case were ongoing, the RTC rendered its
judgment in the criminal case and found Pat-og guilty of the offense charged against him. The CSC-CAR believed that the
act committed by Pat-og was sufficient to find him guilty of Grave Misconduct. It, however, found the corresponding
penalty of dismissal from the service too harsh under the circumstances. Thus he was adjudged for Simply misconduct
(suspension for 6 months). An MR was filed by Pat-og but was denied. Pat-og appealed but was denied and the judgment
was modified to grave misconduct (dismissal).

After evaluating the records, the CSC sustained the CSC-CARs conclusion. Pat-og filed a motion for
reconsideration, questioning for the first time the jurisdiction of CSC over the case. He contended that the administrative
charges against a public school teacher should have been initially heard by a committee pursuant to the Magna carta for
Public School Teachers. The MR was denied. The CA affirmed the resolution of the CSC.

ISSUE:

Whether or not the Civil Service Commission has jurisdiction to hear and decide administrative cases against
public school teachers?

RULING:
Yes.

In Puse v. Santos-Puse, it was held that the CSC, the Department of Education (DepEd) and the Board of
Professional Teachers-Professional Regulatory Commission (PRC) have concurrent jurisdiction over administrative cases
against public school teachers.

In the case at bar, Pat-og, as a public school teacher, is first and foremost, a civil servant accountable to the
people and answerable to the CSC for complaints lodged against him as a public servant.

Under Article IX-B of the 1987 Constitution, the CSC is the body charged with the establishment and
administration of a career civil service which embraces all branches and agencies of the government. Thus, the CSC, as
the central personnel agency of the government, has the inherent power to supervise and discipline all members of the
civil service, including public school teachers.

In the case at bar, since CSC first takes cognizance of the complaint against Pat-og, CSC shall exercise
jurisdiction to the exclusion of Dep Ed and the Board of Professional Teachers.
 #12 MATIAS, Michelle Dulce Candelaria

PAT-OG VS CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION

G.R. NO. 198755
JUN. 5, 2013

Civil Procedure. Concurrent Jurisdiction. that which is possessed over the same parties or subject matter at the same time
by two or more separate tribunals. Where concurrent jurisdiction exists in several tribunals, the body that first takes
cognizance of the complaint shall exercise jurisdiction to the exclusion of others.

FACTS:
Alberto Pat-og, a 3rd year high school teacher of Antadao National High School in Sagada, Mountain Province,
was conducting his MAPEH class when Robert Bang-on, a second-year high school student joined his class, who were
then practicing basketball shots. When Alberto ordered the boys to form two lines, Robert, who thought the order was to
form three lines, inserted himself between the two lines. Alberto then punched him in the stomach. As a result of the
incident, Alberto was hospitalized.

Bang-on filed an administrative case for Grave Misconduct against Pat-og, as well as a criminal case for Slight
Physical Injuries. In the administrative case, Pat-og denied punching Bang-on, claiming he merely stared them down
when they became unruly. In the criminal case, Pat-og was found guilty of the crime and thus applied for probation.

The Civil Service Commission-Cordillera Administrative Region, after conducting hearing, found Pat-og liable for
Simple Misconduct and ordered his suspension for six months without pay. Pat-og appealed the CSC-CAR ruling to the
Civil Service Commission, but the latter affirmed with modification the CSC-CAR ruling, finding him liable for Grave
Misconduct and ordering his dismissal from the service.

It ruled that Pat-ogs conviction in the criminal case, where he acquiesced, can be admitted as evidence in the
administrative case. Alberto was not denied due process when he was not afforded opportunity to cross-examine Roberts
witnesses, as the same is not indispensable in administrative cases.

His act was a wanton transgression of the proper norms of conduct of a public school teacher. In his motion for
reconsideration, Pat-og raised for the first time the issue of jurisdiction of the CSC over the case. He argued that his case
should have been referred to and investigated by a committee first in accordance with the Magna Carta For School
Teachers provided under RA 4670. However, the CSC denied his motion for reconsideration, holding he is estopped from
challenging the jurisdiction of the CSC. When Pat-og elevated his case to the Court of Appeals, the latter affirmed the
ruling of the CSC. Pat-ogs last resort was before the Supreme Court. He argues that he should not have been dismissed
from the service, and the CA was wrong when it ruled that CSC had jurisdiction over the case.

ISSUE/S: Whether or not the Civil Service Commission have jurisdiction over administrative cases involving public school
teachers?

RULING:

Yes, the CSC had acquired jurisdiction over administrative cases involving public school teachers.

In Puse v. Santos-Puse, it was held that the CSC, the Department of Education (DepEd) and the Board of Professional
Teachers-Professional Regulatory Commission (PRC) have concurrent jurisdiction over administrative cases against
public school teachers.

Further, the doctrine of concurrent jurisdiction provides that whenever there is concurrent jurisdiction in several
tribunals, the body that first takes cognizance of the complaint shall exercise jurisdiction to the exclusion of the others.

In this case, it was CSC which first acquired jurisdiction over the case because the complaint was filed before it. Thus, it
had the authority to proceed and decide the case to the exclusion of the DepEd and the Board of Professional Teachers.