4/15/2021 E-Library - Information At Your Fingertips: Printer Friendly filed 14 days from their receipt of the assailed Resolution of the Panel, respondents' appeal had clearly been filed within the reglementary period provided in Rule 43. But petitioner contends that there is no motion for reconsideration which could have been considered as duly filed in this case that may be appealed to the CA as provided in Section 4,[81] Rule 43 of the Rules of Court since respondents' motion for reconsideration had not been filed directly with the Panel in violation of Section 2, Rule III of the Revised Procedural Guidelines in the Conduct of Voluntary Arbitration Proceedings (VA Procedural Guidelines) which provides: SEC. 2. Where to file Pleadings. - All pleadings relative to the voluntary arbitration case shall be filed directly with the chosen voluntary arbitrator at his designated business or professional office copy furnished the Regional Branch of the board having jurisdiction over the workplace of the complainant. For the petitioner, in order for the filing of the motion for reconsideration to be proper, it must be filed at the Voluntary Arbitrators' private addresses or offices.[82] It is also for this reason why the petitioner posits that Section 1[83] of Rule 22 of the Rules of Court does not apply here because "there is no rule or requirement that the offices of Voluntary Arbitrators should be closed on Saturdays, Sundays and Holidays. "[84] By no stretch of the imagination can Section 2, Rule III of the VA Procedural Guidelines can be given a meaning as that advanced by the petitioner. Nothing is better settled than that courts are not to give words a meaning which would lead to absurd or unreasonable consequence.[85] A voluntary arbitrator by the nature of his or her functions acts in a quasi-judicial capacity.[86] Even assuming that the Voluntary Arbitrator or the Panel may not strictly be considered as a quasi-judicial agency, still both the Voluntary Arbitrator and the Panel are comprehended within the concept of a quasi-judicial instrumentality.[87] An "instrumentality" is anything used as a means or agency. Thus, the terms governmental "agency" or "instrumentality" are synonymous in the sense that either of them is a means by which a government acts, or by which a certain government act or function is performed.[88] Since the Panel performs a state function pursuant to a governmental power delegated to them under the Labor Code provisions,[89] it therefore stands to reason that as a governmental instrumentality, the Panel holds office at the NCMB Office and the motion for reconsideration respondents filed thereat had been proper.[90] There is no reason to rule otherwise. The motion was received by the Panel, as in fact it immediately convened upon receipt thereof and acted on the same. While respondents' motion for reconsideration was denied, the denial was not premised on the failure to directly file the motion with the Panel as the term is understood by the petitioner, but because the Panel found the motion to be lacking in merit and filed a day late.[91] However, as ruled correctly by the CA, respondents motion for reconsideration of the Panel's Decision had been timely filed. Section 3 of the VA Procedural Guidelines which provides: https://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocsfriendly/1/66237 15/37