OFFICIALS and employees of the Metropolitan Waterworks and Sewerage System (MWSS) have failed to persuade the Commission on Audit to lift Notices of Disallowance issued against the unauthorized payout of Representation and Transportation Allowances (RATA) in 2012 totaling P8.71 million.
The COA en banc, in a 12-page decision released last week, denied the Petition for Review filed by various former and incumbent MWSS personnel led by former administrator Gerardo Esquivel, senior deputy administrator Nathaniel Santos, and deputy administrator Zoilo Andin.
Directly impacted by the ruling are agency employees with Salary Grade 23 and below who were ordered to refund P6,001,992.84 in unauthorized RATA as the COA held that they are not entitled to such benefits under the 2012 General Appropriations Act.
On the other hand, although qualified to receive RATA, MWSS executives with Salary Grade 24 and above were required to pay back P2,704,617.28 that were paid beyond what they were entitled to.
“This Commission finds the petition for review devoid of merit. The disallowances of the payment of RATA to MWSS employees holding salary grade 23 and below positions, and the excessive rates of RATA to employees holding salary grades 24 and above, are proper,” the Commission declared.
While the petitioners claimed the MWSS Board of Trustees merely acted in good faith when it approved the higher RATA for 2012, the Commission pointed out that the justification is not worthy of belief since there were already prior rulings disallowing the RATA in 2009 and 2010.
For the payment of RATA higher than what was stated in the law, the COA pointed out that the prior approval of the Office of the President is needed.
“There being no approval from the President, the excess monthly RATA granted to qualified employees holding salary grades 24 and above, was correctly disallowed in audit,” the COA said.
In continuing to pay the excess RATA despite disallowance on September 1, 2009 and December 30, 2010, the MWSS BOT can no longer invoke good faith.
“Such acts are inconsistent with the principle of good faith. Their patent disregard of existing rules and regulations, and this Commission’s findings are indicia of bad faith and gross negligence,” the COA stressed.
