o He was at that time already ranked as a Commander in the Philippine Navy He

O he was at that time already ranked as a commander

This preview shows page 8 - 10 out of 25 pages.

o He was, at that time, already ranked as a Commander in the Philippine Navy. He then chose to avail of the monthly retirement pay with the option to receive in advance and in lump sum an amount equivalent to 3 years’ worth for the first three years after his retirement. The AFP granted Reblora’s claim of retirement benefits and immediately paid the latter the sum of P722,297.16 as advance lump, HOWEVER , the AFP did not include Reblora’s civilian government service at the DILG. o The AFP ONLY considered actual military service i.e., covering the period between May 21, 1973 up to May 22, 2003 or a period of only 30 years. Reblora disagreed with computation of the AFP. o He insisted that the computation of his retirement benefit should include the period of his civilian government service at the DILG immediately before he entered military service, which is 4 years and 5 months. o It is argued that the computation of the AFP does not reflect the true length of his military service of thirty- four (34) years and that it is, in fact, a full four (4) years short. Petitioner thus claims that he is entitled to P135,991.81 in additional retirement benefit. After an unsuccessful bid to obtain a favorable legal opinion from the AFP Judge Advocate General, Reblora requested assistance from the COA for the collection of his claimed additional retirement benefit. COA : DENIED Reblora’s claim. o COA agreed that the civilian service at the DILG should and ought to be included as part of his active
Image of page 8
Rule 64 & 65 service in the military for purposes of computing his retirement benefits under PD No. 1638. o However, since his civilian service should be included as part of his active service in the military, the COA opined that petitioner should also have been considered as compulsorily retired on 22 May 2000 and not on 22 May 2003. o COA explained that as of 22 May 2000, Reblora has already reached the age of 56 with a total of 31 years in active service, inclusive of his 4 years in the DILG, which fulfilled the conditions for compulsory retirement under Section 5(a) of PD No. 1638, as amended. o Verily, the COA found that, applying the provisions of PD No. 1638 as amended, Reblora was not actually underpaid but was rather overpaid his retirement benefit in the amount of P77,807.16. Reblora filed a motion for reconsideration, but the COA remained steadfast in its Resolution. o Aggrieved, Reblora questioned the Decision and Resolution of the COA via the present Rule 45 petition before the SC. ISSUE: WON Rule 45 is the proper remedy? HELD: NO. Decisions and resolutions of the COA are reviewable by this Court, not via an appeal by certiorari under Rule 45, as is the present petition, but thru a special civil action of certiorari under Rule 64 in relation to Rule 65 of the Rules of Court. Section 2 of Rule 64, which implements the mandate of Section 7 of Article IX-A of the Constitution,19 is clear on this: Section 2. Mode of Review.—A judgment or final order or resolution of the Commission on Elections and the Commission on Audit may be brought by the aggrieved
Image of page 9
Image of page 10

You've reached the end of your free preview.

Want to read all 25 pages?

  • Fall '19
  • Supreme Court of the United States, COMELEC

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture