Scribd
Upload
570 views2 pages

Tesda Vs Coa

The COA properly exercised its constitutional authority to audit government expenditures and disallow irregular payments when it issued a notice of disallowance for TESDA's payment of a P5,000 healthcare maintenance allowance to its employees. While the allowance was authorized by an administrative order, the COA determined it had no legal basis under the Salary Standardization Law. As the guardian of public funds, the COA has broad discretion to prevent unauthorized uses of funds and define the scope of its audits. The Supreme Court upheld that the COA acted within its jurisdiction and did not abuse its discretion.

Uploaded by

lucky javellana
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
570 views2 pages

Tesda Vs Coa

The COA properly exercised its constitutional authority to audit government expenditures and disallow irregular payments when it issued a notice of disallowance for TESDA's payment of a P5,000 healthcare maintenance allowance to its employees. While the allowance was authorized by an administrative order, the COA determined it had no legal basis under the Salary Standardization Law. As the guardian of public funds, the COA has broad discretion to prevent unauthorized uses of funds and define the scope of its audits. The Supreme Court upheld that the COA acted within its jurisdiction and did not abuse its discretion.

Uploaded by

lucky javellana
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 2

Lucky Javellana

Jurisdiction

The Case: TECHNICAL EDUCATION AND SKILLS DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY


(TESDA), Petitioner, v. THE COMMISSION ON AUDIT; CHAIRMAN REYNALDO
A. VILLAR; COMMISSIONER JUANITO G. ESPINO, JR.; AND COMMISSIONER
EVELYN R. SAN BUENAVENTURA, Respondents. G.R. No. 196418, February
10, 2015

Facts: The TESDA, an instrumentality of the Government established under


Republic Act No. 7796, is an attached agency of the Department of Labor and
Employment (DOLE). In view of the inadequate policy on basic health and
safety conditions of work experienced by government personnel, then DOLE
Secretary Patricia Sto. Tomas issued Administrative Order authorizing the
payment of healthcare maintenance allowance of P5,000.00 to all officials and
employees of the DOLE, including its bureaus and attached agencies. AO No.
430 was purportedly based on Civil Service Commission Memorandum Circular
and Section 34 of the General Provisions of the 2003 General Appropriations
Act.
Upon post-audit, COA State Auditor IV Rosemarie A. Valenzuela issued
AOM and later endorsed the matter to the COA Director of the LAO-National for
appropriate legal action.
Atty. Rebecca Mislang, Officer In-Charge of the COA LAO-National,
subsequently issued Notice of Disallowance addressed to then TESDA Director
General Augusto Syjuco, indicating that the payment of the allowance had no
legal basis, it being contrary to Republic Act No. 6758 (Salary Standardization
Law of 1989).

Issue. Is the issuance of disallowance notice by COA correct?

Held. Yes, the COA did not act without or in excess of jurisdiction, or with
grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction because it
properly exercised its powers and discretion in disallowing the payment of the
P5,000.00 as healthcare maintenance allowance.
The COA is endowed with latitude to determine, prevent, and disallow
irregular, unnecessary, excessive, extravagant, or unconscionable expenditures
of government funds. It has the power to ascertain whether public funds were
utilized for the purpose for which they had been intended by law. The
Constitution has made the COA “the guardian of public funds, vesting it with
broad powers over all accounts pertaining to government revenue and
expenditures and the uses of public funds and property, including the
exclusive authority to define the scope of its audit and examination, establish
the techniques and methods for such review, and promulgate accounting and
auditing rules and regulations.” Thus, the COA is generally accorded complete
discretion in the exercise of its constitutional duty and responsibility to
examine and audit expenditures of public funds, particularly those which are
perceptibly beyond what is sanctioned by law.

Doctrine learned. As an administrative office the COA has expertise as to the


laws they are entrusted to enforce. It is within their discretion whether or not it
is proper to issue a notice of disallowance.

You might also like

pFad - Phonifier reborn

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.

Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.


Alternative Proxies:

Alternative Proxy

pFad Proxy

pFad v3 Proxy

pFad v4 Proxy