THE Supreme Court upheld with finality its decision dismissing a former District supervisor of Quedan and Rural Credit Guarantee Corp. (Quedancor) in Cagayan de Oro City, arising from his alleged unauthorized withdrawals of money deposited by a client of the said corporation.

In an en banc ruling signed by Clerk of Court Enriqueta Vidal, the tribunal denied with finality the motion for reconsideration filed by Florentino Veloso as it ordered that an “entry of judgment be made in due course.”

“After a careful consideration of the respondent’s arguments, we find no merit in these arguments and accordingly deny his motion,” the High Court stated.

In June, the court granted the petition filed by Francisco Duque 3rd, chairman of the Civil Service Commission (CSC), and reversed and set aside the decision dated August 20, 2010 and the resolution dated March 8, 2011 issued by the Court of Appeals (CA).

The High Court reinstated the resolution of the Civil Service Commission, affirming the decision dated August 11, 2004 of Quedancor.

The said resolution dismissed Veloso from government service, cancelled his eligibility to hold any government post, forfeited his retirement benefits, and perpetually disqualified him for reemployment in the government service for dishonesty.

Records show that Veloso was administratively charged with three counts of dishonesty in connection with his unauthorized withdrawals of money deposited by one Juanito Quino, the complainant in the case.

The complainant applied for a restructuring of his loan with Quedancor and deposited P50,000 to Quedancor’s cashier for his Manila account.

In three separate occasions, the respondent, without notice and authority from the complainant and with the assistance of Quedancor’s cashier, managed to withdraw the P50,000 deposit.

Upon the discovery of the withdrawals, the complainant demanded the return of the money and called the attention of the manager of Quedancor in Cagayan de Oro City, who issued to the respondent a memorandum requiring him to explain the withdrawals and to return the money.

In compliance with the memorandum, the respondent returned the money. The respondent admitted having received the P50,000 from Quedancor’s cashier knowing that it was intended for the complainant’s loan repayment.

Veloso was eventually charged by Quedancor with dishonesty and was subsequently found guilty of the charges and dismissed from the service. The CSC affirmed the findings and conclusions of Quedancor on appeal.

Dissatisfied with the adverse rulings of Quedancor and the CSC, Veloso elevated his case to the CA, which adjudged him guilty of dishonesty, but modified the penalty of dismissal to one-year suspension from office without pay due to the existence of mitigating circumstances.

Because of this, Duque sought redress before the high court, which granted his petition.

The SC, however, disagreed with the CA’s conclusion that mitigating circumstances warranted the mitigation of the prescribed penalty imposed against Veloso.

“Under the circumstances, the administrative offense of dishonesty committed by the respondent was serious on account of the supervisory position he held at Quedancor and the nature of Quedancor’s business,” the High Court stated.

“Quedancor deals with the administration, management and disposition of public funds which the respondent was entrusted to handle.”