FORMER Local Water Utilities Administration (Lwua) Chairman Prospero Pichay has asked the Supreme Court to reverse the Court of Appeals decision which affirmed the legality of the preventive suspension order issued against him by the Ombudsman.

In a 22-page petition, Pichay insisted that the appellate court erred in holding that the petition assailing his suspension is already moot and academic following his dismissal from the government service by the Ombudsman through an order issued in July.

Pichay insisted that his dismissal was not yet final and executory, thus, the CA should not have junked his petition for being moot.

“Since said Order of Dismissal of the then acting Ombudsman is not yet final, the legal issues raised by petitioner in the instant petition still remain justiciable controversies which this Honorable Court can resolve and as such, the case at bar cannot yet be considered moot and academic,” he claimed.


He also alleged that there was no reason for his preventive suspension since his case before the Ombudsman was already submitted for resolution then.
 

“The Office of the Ombudsman admitted that the evidence submitted were
 sufficient for it to render a decision. Hence, it was unnecessary to place petitioner under preventive suspension simply because the same serves no purpose,” he argued.

Pichay named as respondents the Office of the Ombudsman, Lwua
 employees Rustico Tutol, Luis DG Estrada and Carmen Amores, and the Office
 of the Executive Secretary.

The appellate court earlier said Pichay’s petition should be dismissed for being moot and academic in light of the July 4 decision of then acting Ombudsman Orlando Casimiro dismissing him from the service.

The appellate court did not give credence to Pichay’s arguments that his petition should not be dismissed considering that the order of then-acting Ombudsman has not become final and executory.

“It bears to note that the Office of the Ombudsman has already adjudged petitioner guilty of the administrative charges against him and ordered his dismissal from the service, which decision is immediately executoy even pending appeal,” the CA said.

“As such, the herein assailed order of preventive suspension was effectively terminated and superseded by the decision dated July 4, 2011,” it added.

The CA added that the determination by the Court of the propriety of Pichay’s preventive suspension will be “inconsequential” and “not serve any useful purpose.”