An independent Philippine legal research libraryRead with context. Verify with confidence.
← Back to library
DILG legal opinionSource checked

Salary Pending PS — DILG Region I opinion letter

DILG Region I letter dated 2011-06-10 — Salary Pending PS · 2011 · DILG regional legal opinions — verified official source

Source checked. The source check identifies the document; it does not verify every transcribed word or its current legal effect. Recovered or scanned text may contain errors. Compare the wording and subsequent history with the linked legal source.

CHECK ORIGINAL WORDING · DIGITAL P. 1 / 2
REPUBLIG OF THE PHILIPPINES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT Regional Office No. l, San Fernando City, La Union Tel. Nos. (072) 888-21-08; 700-57-46 888'22-89;7O0-27-01;7O0-36-79;607'12-4s Fax Nos. 888-22-94: 7 00-27 -03 June 10,2011 CLEMSY B. SAGUTO-.BENINSIG Executive Assistant V Municipality of Sudipen 2520 La Union Dear Ms. Beninsig w,, This refers to your letter seeking the Department's clarification on the entitlement of backwages of Hon. Mayor Alexander O. Buquing during the period of his preventive suspension. Before dwelling on the issue, may we first invite your attention to the provision of the Locat Government Code of 1991, to wiU Sec. 64. Salary of Respondent Pending Suspension. - The respondent official preventively suspended from office shall receive no salary or compensation during such suspension; Dut upon sub*quent etonerqtion and reinstotement, he SHALL BE PAID ful, filary or cornpniltion including such emotuments accru i ng d u ring suclt su sp nsion. In BRUGADA vs. THE SECRETARY OF EDUCATION. CIJITURE AND SPORTS. 6.R. No. 142332-43. Januarv 31. 2fl15. The Court categorically declared that the payment of back wages during the period of suspension of a civil servant who is subsequently reinstated is proper if he is found innocefi of the ciiharaes and the susoension is uniustrTied. 'The Joint Resolution of the Office of the Deputy Ombudsman for Luzon in OMB-L-C-06- 0992-1, entitled Melvin Macusi, et. al vs. Alexander Q. Buquing, dismissed the case against respondent Buquing because based from records, there exist no probable cause for the charge of violation of R.A. 3019. And with regard to the charge of dereliction of duty, misconduct in office and gross negligenci, the Ombudsman held that there exists substantial evidence against the respondent for Simple Misconduct in office. However, the imposition of the administrative penalty on the respondent can no longer be enforced because, in view of his re-election as Municipal Mayor in the last local election conducted on May 14, 2OO7, it became moot and academic by reason of the Aguinaldo Doctrine." Celebrating 20 Years of Local Autonomy i'n the Philippines s._._r :ltx