SO ORDERED.[11]     POMI appealed to the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC), claiming that there was prima facie abuse of discretion on the part of the Labor Arbiter in granting the claims of De Jesus. The NLRC granted the appeal. It found De Jesus guilty of unauthorized possession of medicines on board M/V Author, justifying his discharge. Likewise, it denied the claim for medical and sickness allowance, stating that a relapse of ulcer was not work- related, as the illness already existed when De Jesus applied with POMI, but the former intentionally concealed it so he could be hired. Such misrepresentation disqualified De Jesus from claiming employment benefits under the contract. Finally, the NLRC sustained POMI in applying De Jesus unpaid salaries to the cost of his repatriation. [12] Hence, it reversed the decision of the Labor Arbiter, viz.:   WHEREFORE, premises considered, the appeal is hereby GRANTED. Accordingly, the Decision appealed from is totally REVERSED and SET ASIDE and a new one [is] entered DISMISSING the instant case for lack of merit.   SO ORDERED.[13]     De Jesus motion for reconsideration having been denied by the Resolution[14] of July 30, 2001, he elevated the case to the Court of Appeals on petition forcertiorari.   In its Decision[15] of September 28, 2001, the Court of Appeals affirmed the NLRC. It agreed with the NLRC that De Jesus misrepresentation disqualified him from employment, benefits and claims. The appellate court added that De Jesus did not categorically deny the charge of unauthorized possession of Cimetidine, in violation of the Standard Employment Contract Addendum. The CA concluded that POMI was justified in discharging him from M/V Author, and the NLRC, thus, acted well within its discretion in reversing the findings of the Labor Arbiter.