and reinstated the January 28, 1999 Decision of Labor Arbiter Mayor, Jr. The decretal portion reads:   WHEREFORE, the premises considered, the petition is GRANTED. The Assailed Decision and Resolution of the NLRC, First Division dated July 31, 2006 and May 30, 2007, respectively are hereby ANNULLED and SET ASIDE for having been issued with grave abuse of discretion and the January 28, 1999 Decision of the Labor Arbiter, REINSTATED.   SO ORDERED.37[37]     In reinstating the Labor Arbiter’s January 28, 1999 Decision, the appellate court ruled, first, that the NLRC gravely abused its discretion in remanding the case back to the Labor Arbiter on the mistaken notion that the determination of Bastol’s health ailment and entitlement to disability benefits under the 1994 revised SEC cannot be ascertained without conducting a formal trial. It ratiocinated that Art. 221 of the Labor Code as amended by Sec. 11 of Republic Act No. (RA) 6715 in relation to Sec. 4, Rule V of the NLRC Rules of Procedure then prevailing granted the Labor Arbiter discretion to determine the necessity for a formal hearing or investigation. In the instant case, the CA found that the Labor Arbiter acted properly and ruled appropriately on the evidence on record without need for formal hearings. Thus, the NLRC gravely abused its discretion when it dismissed the instant case.   37[37] Id. at 228-229.