remanded the case to Labor Arbiter Mayor, Jr. “for conduct of further approximate proceedings and to terminate the same with dispatch.”55[55]   Second Substantive Issue: Sufficiency of Sworn Affidavit   And the primordial reason why the argument of OSCI for the mandatory conduct of clarificatory hearings requiring the personal appearance of Bastol and the testimonies of Dr. Lim and Dr. Vicaldo is erroneous is that the law and the rules do not require such mandatory clarificatory hearings.   Labor Arbiter Has Discretion on the Propriety of Conducting Clarificatory Hearings     While it can be argued that the NLRC through its July 30, 1999 Decision skewed to have clarificatory hearings for the presentation of evidence, it cannot be gainsaid that with the remand of the case, the Labor Arbiter must proceed in accordance to the Rules governing proceedings before him provided under the prevailing Rules of Procedure of the NLRC.56[56] 55[55] Supra note 22. 56[56] As amended by Resolution 3-99, Series of 1999, issued on December 10, 1999 by the NLRC En Banc.