GSIS V Daymiel

GSIS v Daymiel (NAME) how his right was violated and that GSIS Act vests in the GSIS
s violated and that GSIS Act vests in the GSIS Board of

March 11, 2019 | J.C. Reyes, Jr., J. | Promulgated in accordance with prescribed Trustees the original and exclusive jurisdiction to hear disputes
rules administered by it.
8. The RTC initially granted the motion to dismiss but eventually reversed
PETITIONER: Government Service Insurance System. upon Daymiel’s motion for reconsideration. In so ruling, the RTC held that
the administrative issuances in question should have been published in the
RESPONDENT: Apolinario K. Daymiel, substituted by his heirs, Madeline D. Official Gazette or any newspaper of general circulation. RTC also did not
Viloria, Yolanda D. De Castro, Jovena D. Acojedo, Alberto Daymiel, Ma. apply the doctrine of primary jurisdiction as it considered the issue as a
Imelda D. Gandola, Maridel D. Morandante, and Nympha Daymiel. question of law.
9. Trial ensued and RTC eventually dismissed the petition for lack of
DOCTRINE: jurisdiction pursuant to GSIS Act stating that GSIS has jurisdiction over the
Administrative issuances may be classified into two, legislative rule and subject matter as the computation of respondent’s retirement benefits was in
administrative rule. the exercise of its quasi-judicial function.
 Legislative rule – matter of subordinate legislation, designed to 10. Upon appeal to CA, Daymiel got a favorable decision. CA reversed the
implement a primary legislation by providing the details thereof ruling of the RTC and held that the RTC has jurisdiction since the
 Administrative rule – designed to provide guidelines to the law petition is one for declaratory relief. Furthermore, the administrative
which the administrative agency oversees enforcing. issuances in question are null and void for not being published in the
Official Gazette or in any newspaper of general circulation.
11. GSIS then filed an MR but was denied, hence this petition to the SC
FACTS: ISSUE/s:
1. Apolinario Daymiel served as a casual laborer at the Provincial Engineering 1. Whether the regular court has jurisdiction over the subject matter of the case
Office of the Provincial Government of Zamboanga del Norte. He - YES
eventually assumed the position of Accounting Clerk III until his retirement 2. Whether the administrative issuances are null and void for not having been
on July 1, 2003. published in the Official Gazette or in any newspaper of general circulation
2. Daymiel, upon his retirement, applied for retirement benefits. A - YES
tentative computation was made pursuant to Daymiel’s application.
GSIS initially granted a total of 33.66 of creditable service, with a lump RULING:
sum payment equal to P542,325 and a monthly pension of P9,038.75. 1. Jurisdiction over subject matter is conferred by the Constitution or law.
3. However, a recomputation was made wherein GSIS credited only 23.85 Only a statute can confer jurisdiction on courts and administrative agencies.
yrs of service and accordingly decreased the respondent’s lump sum 2. In the exercise of an administrative agency’s quasi-judicial powers, doctrine
payment to P384,295.80 with a monthly pension at P5,886.77. of primary jurisdiction may be invoked.
4. Unsatisfied, Daymiel wrote a letter to the GSIS and inquired as to the
legal basis for such computation. In this case, Sec 30 of RA 8291 or GSIS Act vests upon GSIS original and
5. It appeared that the recomputation was made because of the exclusive jurisdiction to hear disputes arising from said law.
implementation of GSIS administrative issuances (PPG No. 171-03 and 3. However, records disclose that what Daymiel was seeking for is the
Resolution No. 90). nullification of the administrative issuances on the ground of illegality.
6. Daymiel then filed a petition for Declaratory Relief, Mandamus, and While his contention deals with a dispute as to the computation of
Damages. In his petition, Daymiel interpreted the administrative retirement benefits, his petition mainly attacks the legality of the assailed
issuances in question as prejudicial to him since the starting point issuances. And since his petition is one for declaratory relief and he has all
stated therein for the computation of the creditable service of a retiree the requisites for such petition to prosper, regular courts have jurisdiction.
shall be the date of the payment of monthly contributions, whereas the 4. As to the invalidity of the issuances, the SC affirmed the CA’s ruling.
starting point as regards GSIS Act of 1997 is the date of original 5. Administrative issuances may be classified into two, legislative rule and
appointment administrative rule.
7. GSIS filed a motion to dismiss on the grounds of failure to state cause of a. Legislative rule – matter of subordinate legislation, designed to
action and lack of jurisdiction. They alleged that Daymiel failed to establish implement a primary legislation by providing the details
thereof
b. Administrative rule – designed to provide guidelines to the law
which the administrative agency oversees enforcing.
6. When an administrative ruling is merely interpretative, its applicability
needs nothing further than its bare issuance, for it gives no real consequence
more than what the law itself has already prescribed.
On the other hand, when an administrative rule goes beyond merely

providing for the means that can facilitate or render least cumbersome
the implementation of the law but substantially increases the burden of
those governed, it behooves the agency to accord at least to those
directly affected a chance to be heard, and thereafter to be duly
informed, before that new issuance is given the force and effect of law.
7. Clearly, the administrative issuances in question are legislative rules. It
does not merely provide guidelines to RA 8291, but in fact, creates a
burden upon those who are governed. Specifically, these administrative
issuances supply conditions for the starting point when services are
rendered, for the purposes of computing all benefits under RA 8291
(GSIS Act)
8. However, there was no condition and definition provided under RA
8291; services we neither defined nor delineated for the purposes of
computing benefits. In other words, the administrative issuances
provide details for the starting point of the computation of GSIS
benefits. It effectively supplants the period prescribed under the GSIS
Act (RA 8291)
9. As these administrative issuances are legislative rules, publication is
indispensable. Since these administrative issuances were not published,
they then must be struck down as unconstitutional.
WHEREFORE, premises considered, the instant petition is hereby DENIED.

Accordingly, the Decision dated February 25, 2014 and the Resolution dated April
28, 2015 of the Court of Appeals-Cagayan de Oro City in CA-GR CV No. 01773-
MIN are AFFIRMED.

GSIS V Daymiel

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

GSIS V Daymiel

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

GSIS V Daymiel

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

GSIS v Daymiel (NAME) how his right was violated and that GSIS Act vests in the GSIS

s violated and that GSIS Act vests in the GSIS Board of

On the other hand, when an administrative rule goes beyond merely

WHEREFORE, premises considered, the instant petition is hereby DENIED.

You might also like