SECOND DIVISION.
.
GRIO LENDING
SERVICES,
Complainant,
A.M.
No.
P-03-1757
(Formerly A.M.
No.
OCA-IPI-02-1527-P)
December 10, 2003
-versus-
SALVACION
SERMONIA,
CLERK IV,REGIONAL
TRIAL
COURT,
BRANCH 26, ILOILO CITY,
Respondent.
R E S O L U T I O
N
CALLEJO,
SR., J.:
Before the Court
is the verified complaint dated November 6, 2002, filed against
Salvacion
Sermonia, Clerk IV of the Regional Trial Court of Iloilo City, Branch
26,
for willful failure to pay just debts.chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
The verified complaint
was filed by Mitchill Grio, who alleged that on November 5, 1999,
respondent
Sermonia obtained loans from the Grio Lending Services in the total
amount
of forty thousand pesos (P40,000.00) payable in installments. When the
loans became due, and upon demand by the complainant, the respondent
issued
postdated checks in favor of the latter as follows:chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
Check
No.
Date
Amount
chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
Pilipinas
Bank Check
No.
0040325
March 31, 2000
P20,000.00
0040326
March 31, 2000
P20,000.00
0040327
April 1,
2000
P2,000.00
0040328
April 1,
2000
P2,000.00
—————
Total P44,000.00[1]
chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
When the checks were
presented for encashment, however, these were dishonored by the bank
with
the notation "account closed" stamped thereon. Despite repeated demands
on the respondent, she failed and refused to pay her obligation.
Consequently,
the complainant was constrained to file the present administrative
complaint.chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
In her Comment dated
July 4, 2003, the respondent averred that she had already explained to
the complainant her financial predicament and requested that she (the
respondent)
be given more time to pay her obligation. Finding the respondent's
explanation
acceptable, the complainant agreed to withdraw her complaint against
the
respondent. Attached to the respondent's comment are the complainant's
Affidavit of Desistance dated December 2, 2002, and her letter of even
date addressed to Executive Judge Tito G. Gustilo, RTC of Iloilo City,
requesting for the withdrawal of the complaint she filed against the
respondent.
The complainant alleged that she and the respondent had reached an
amicable
settlement and the latter had made arrangements for the payment of her
obligation.
chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
Upon evaluation of
the verified complaint and the comment thereon, Deputy Court
Administrator
Zenaida N. Elepaño recommended that the respondent be
reprimanded
and severely warned to be more circumspect in the conduct of her
activities
as a court employee, and to observe strict propriety and decorum in
dealing
with other people.[2]chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
The Court agrees with
and adopts the foregoing recommendation.chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
As correctly pointed
out by Deputy Court Administrator Elepaño, despite the amicable
settlement reached by the parties, the respondent should nonetheless be
held administratively liable for her actuations. Significantly, it was
only when the verified complaint was filed against her that respondent
exerted efforts to make arrangements to pay her obligation to the
complainant.
Before the filing of the complaint, the respondent consistently ignored
the complainant's repeated demands.chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
The respondent is, thus,
liable under Section 46, Chapter 7, Title I, Subtitle A, Book V of the
Administrative
Code of 1987 (Executive Order No. 292) which covers the respondent
as a court personnel. The said provision reads in part:chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
Sec. 46.
Discipline:
General Provisions. — (a) No officer or employee in the Civil Service
shall
be suspended or dismissed except for cause as provided by law and after
due process.chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
x
x
x
x x
x
x x x
(b) The following
shall
be grounds for disciplinary action:chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
x
x
x
x x
x
x x xchanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
(22) Willful
failure
to pay just debts or willful failure to pay taxes to the
government
x x xchanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
Further, Section 23,
Rule XIV of the Omnibus Rules Implementing the 1987
Administrative Code defines "just debts" as including those "claims
the existence and justness of which are admitted by the debtor." It
cannot
be gainsaid that the respondent admitted the existence of her debt to
the
complainant in this case.
chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
The same rule
classifies
the willful failure to pay just debts as a light offense and prescribes
the penalty of reprimand for the first offense, suspension for one (1)
to thirty (30) days for the second offense, and dismissal for the third
offense. Apparently, this is the respondent's first offense; hence, the
penalty of reprimand is proper. It must be stressed that the penalty
imposed
by the law is not directed at the respondent's private life but at her
actuation unbecoming a public official.[3]
chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
It bears stressing
at this point that employees of the judiciary should be living examples
of uprightness not only in the performance of official duties but also
in their personal and private dealing with other people so as to
preserve
at all times the good name and standing of the courts in the community.[4]
chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
WHEREFORE, respondent
Salvacion Sermonia, Clerk IV of the Regional Trial Court of Iloilo
City,
Branch 26, is REPRIMANDED for her willful failure to pay just debts,
which
amounts to conduct unbecoming a court employee. The commission of the
same
or similar acts in the future will be dealt with more severely.
chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
SO ORDERED.chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
Puno, Quisumbing,
Austria-Martinez
and Tinga, JJ., concur.chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
____________________________
Endnotes:
[1]
Rollo, p. 1.chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
[2]
Id. at 19.chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
[3]
Uy vs. Magallanes, Jr., 380 SCRA 414 (2002).chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
[4]
Santelices vs. Samar, 373 SCRA 78 (2002).chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred |