Scribd
Upload
366 views2 pages

Dubongco v. COA G.R. No. 237813, March 5, 2019 J.C. Reyes, JR., J.: Facts

The Court ruled that the Department of Agrarian Reform-Provincial Office-Cavite (DARPO-Cavite) illegally used funds from the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program (CARP) Fund to provide Collective Negotiation Agreement (CNA) incentives to its employees in 2009 and 2010. The Commission on Audit issued Notices of Disallowance, finding that the CARP Fund, as a special fund created by law for agrarian reform projects, could not be used to finance CNA incentives. The Court affirmed this, noting the mandatory language in relevant issuances that CNA incentives must be funded through savings from operating expenses, not the CARP Fund.

Uploaded by

Ronna Mae Agcopra
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
366 views2 pages

Dubongco v. COA G.R. No. 237813, March 5, 2019 J.C. Reyes, JR., J.: Facts

The Court ruled that the Department of Agrarian Reform-Provincial Office-Cavite (DARPO-Cavite) illegally used funds from the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program (CARP) Fund to provide Collective Negotiation Agreement (CNA) incentives to its employees in 2009 and 2010. The Commission on Audit issued Notices of Disallowance, finding that the CARP Fund, as a special fund created by law for agrarian reform projects, could not be used to finance CNA incentives. The Court affirmed this, noting the mandatory language in relevant issuances that CNA incentives must be funded through savings from operating expenses, not the CARP Fund.

Uploaded by

Ronna Mae Agcopra
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

Dubongco v.

COA
G.R. No. 237813, March 5, 2019
J.C. Reyes, Jr., J.:

Facts
Public Sector Labor Management Council (PSLMC) issued Resolution No. 4, Series of
2002, entitled "Grant of Collective Negotiation Agreement (CNA) Incentive for National
Government Agencies, State Universities and Colleges and Local Government Units."
The CNA Incentive is awarded to employees in "recognition of the joint efforts of labor
and management in the achievement of planned targets, programs and services
approved in the budget of the agency at a lesser cost."

In 2009 and 2010, the Department of Agrarian Reform-Provincial Office-Cavite


(DARPO-Cavite) released CNA Incentive to its officials and employees in the aggregate
amounts of P1,518,800.00 and P1,176,000.00, respectively. The grant was sourced
from the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program (CARP) Fund.

Consequently, respondent COA, through the Audit Team Leader and Supervising
Auditor of Audit Group E-Cavite Province, issued two Notices of Disallowance (NDs)
against DARPO-Cavite.

The audit officers reasoned that the utilization of the CARP Fund for the grant of CNA
Incentive was illegal because the appropriation and expenditure of the CARP Fund
must be in accordance with the law creating the same.

The COA added that the CARP Fund is a special fund which could only be utilized for
the purpose for which it was created, that is, solely for the implementation of CARP
projects.

Issue
Whether the Carp Fund can be a valid source for the grant of CAN incentive to rank-
and-file employees.

Ruling
it is unequivocal that the CARP Fund could not be legally used to finance the grant of
the CNA Incentive. Both A.O. No. 135 and DBM Budget Circular No. 2006-01 use the
word "shall" when pertaining to the funds to be used in the CNA Incentive, that is,
savings from operating expenses. The word "shall" is imperative, underscoring the
mandatory character of the provisions. 24 Petitioner cannot give a different
interpretation to the provisions of A.O. No. 135 and DBM Budget Circular No. 2006-01
and insist that the CNA Incentive may be taken from the CARP Fund. The words of the
abovementioned issuances are clear and unambiguous.

petitioner admits that the CARP Fund is a special trust fund.


The principle of unjust enrichment requires two conditions: (1) that a person is benefited
without a valid basis or justification; and (2) that such benefit is derived at the expense
of another. Conversely, there is no unjust enrichment when the person who will benefit
has a valid claim to such benefit

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