G.R. No. 144218 . July 14, 2006.
EMILIE G. DE LUNA, petitioner, vs. FEDERICO C. PASCUAL, in his capacity as President and General Manager, and DANIEL N. MIJARES, in his capacity as Sr. Vice-President for Branches, both of the Government Service Insurance System (GSIS), respondents.

FACTS

Petitioner Emilie de Luna, Branch Manager of the GSIS Lucena City Branch, was administratively charged by her subordinates for Oppression and Grave Misconduct. After investigation, then GSIS President Federico Pascual rendered a decision finding her guilty and ordering her dismissal. The GSIS Board of Trustees affirmed this decision. Respondents attempted to serve the decision on petitioner personally at the GSIS Manila office, but she refused receipt, insisting it be served on her counsel. The decision was then sent via registered mail to her branch office and was received by her secretary, who informed petitioner by phone. Petitioner, claiming she was sick and would undergo an operation, instructed her secretary to hold the documents and stated she would personally receive them later at the GSIS Pasay City office.
Petitioner filed a petition with the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Lucena City, arguing the decision was not yet final and executory as she had not been properly served. The RTC granted her petition for a writ of preliminary injunction, enjoining her dismissal. The Court of Appeals reversed the RTC, nullifying the injunction. The CA held that there was valid service, thus the decision had become final, depriving the RTC of jurisdiction to issue the injunction.

ISSUE

Whether the Court of Appeals erred in ruling that the administrative decision dismissing petitioner had become final and executory due to valid service, thereby rendering the RTC’s issuance of a writ of preliminary injunction a grave abuse of discretion.

RULING

The Supreme Court denied the petition and affirmed the Court of Appeals. The legal logic centers on the perfection of an appeal from an administrative decision. Service of the decision triggers the reglementary period to appeal. Under Section 14 of the Revised Administrative Code and Civil Service rules, service is completed upon receipt by the party or counsel, or by registered mail.
Here, the decision was sent via registered mail to petitioner’s official station, the GSIS Lucena City Branch, which was her correct address. Her secretary received it and informed her. Petitioner’s instruction to her secretary to hold the documents and her refusal to accept service personally constituted a deliberate evasion of service. The law does not countenance such tactics; service is deemed complete upon receipt at the office of the addressee. Consequently, the period for filing a motion for reconsideration or an appeal began to run from such receipt. Petitioner’s failure to appeal within the reglementary period rendered the administrative decision final and executory. A final and executory decision can no longer be enjoined. Therefore, the RTC had no jurisdiction to issue the preliminary injunction, and the Court of Appeals correctly annulled it for having been issued with grave abuse of discretion.