Republic of the Philippines

NATIONAL POLICE COMMISSION

PHILIPPINE NATIONAL POLICE
POLICE REGIONAL OFFICE 3
OFFICE OF THE REGIONAL DIRECTOR
Camp Captain Julian Olivas, City of San Fernando, Pampanga

PHILIPPINE NATIONAL POLICE,

Complainant, Admin Case No.
PRO3-RHQ-RHSG-2017-0528
-versus- For: Grave Neglect of Duty
(289 days AWOL)

PO1 Aron B Thalla,

Respondent.
x------------------------------------------x

RESOLUTION

This resolves the Motion for Reconsideration (MR) filed by PO1 Aron B Thalla
(Movant), assailing the Decision of the Regional Director, PRO 3 dated April 25,
2018, the dispositive portion of which states:

“WHEREFORE, premises considered, respondent PO1 Aron B

Thalla is hereby found GUILTY of Grave Neglect of Duty and is hereby
meted with the penalty of DISMISSAL from the PNP service.”

Records show that movant was assigned at the Tarlac City Police Office,
Tarlac PPO. However, he failed to report for duty on September 25, 2016 to July 10,
2017, incurring a total of Two Hundred Eighty Nine (289) days unauthorized
absences. He was charged, found guilty and meted the penalty of Dismissal from the
service. Hence, this MR claiming that movant committed unauthorized absences due
to unfortunate circumstances, thus, the penalty of dismissal be reduced or
downgraded.

This Office finds that the MR is not meritorious. It does not raise valid ground
to warrant the reversal or modification of the Decision sought to be reconsidered.

Section 20, Rule 17 of NAPOLCOM Memorandum Circular No. 2016-002

provides that: “The party adversely affected by the decision may file a motion for
reconsideration with the Disciplinary Authority which rendered the same within ten
(10) days from receipt of a copy thereof based on any of the following grounds:

a) Newly discovered evidence which, if presented, would materially affect the

decision rendered; or
b) Errors of law or irregularities have been committed prejudicial to the
substantial rights and interest of the movant; or
c) The decision is not supported by the evidence on record.”
 The ground raised by the movant does not fall under any of the following
valid/legal grounds above-cited.

Movant claimed that his father incurred serious illness (Coronary Heart
Decease) and there was no one else to take care of his father except the movant.
On the process, he was gravely affected emotionally and psychologically.

The above circumstances are not sufficient excuse for him to inform his unit/
situation of his predicament. He did not attach any medical certificate/s to prove his
claim. He could have exerted efforts to report to his unit to file an application for
leave, or to inform his superior of his inability to report for duty thru other means of
communications. He failed in this aspect and chooses to be on AWOL for a long
period of time (289 days). It would have been excusable if the period of AWOL is
less than thirty (30) days. Thus, there is no valid reason to disturb the decision
rendered based on substantial evidence.

WHEREFORE, foregoing premises considered, the motion for reconsideration

filed by PO1 Aron B Thalla, is hereby DENIED FOR LACK OF MERIT.

SO RESOLVED.

Done this _____ day of ____________ at Camp Captain Julian Olivas, City of
San Fernando, Pampanga.

AMADOR V CORPUS
Police Chief Superintendent
Regional Director, PRO 3

Republic of the Philippines

 NATIONAL POLICE COMMISSION
PHILIPPINE NATIONAL POLICE
POLICE REGIONAL OFFICE 3
REGIONAL LEGAL OFFICE 3
Camp Captain Julian Olivas, City of San Fernando, Pampanga
MEMORANDUM
FOR : RD, PRO3

THRU : DRDA ____________

: RCDS ____________

: AC, RPHRDD _________

FROM : AC, RLO3
SUBJECT : Motion for Reconsideration of PO1 Aron B Thalla
DATE : May 31, 2018

1. Reference: AC, RPHRDD memorandum dated May 21, 2018 with attached
records of the case.
2. This pertains to the motion for reconsideration (MR) filed by PO1 Aron B
Thalla, assailing the Decision of the Regional Director, PRO 3 dated April 25, 2018,
the dispositive portion of which states:

“WHEREFORE, premises considered, respondent PO1 Aron B

Thalla is hereby found GUILTY of Grave Neglect of Duty and is hereby
meted with the penalty of DISMISSAL from the PNP service.”
3. This Office finds that the MR is not meritorious. Hence, recommend denial.
4. Respectfully submitted for consideration and signature on the attached
draft Resolution.

ANSELMO E ANDAYAN
Police Superintendent