A.M. No. P-07-2292, September 28, 2010
Civil Service Commission, Cordillera Administrative Region, Baguio City vs. Rita S. Chulyao, Clerk of Court II, MCTC, Barlig, Mountain Province

FACTS

The Civil Service Commission (CSC) received an anonymous complaint alleging that Rita S. Chulyao, Clerk of Court II, had her sister, Raquel Pangowon, take the July 31, 1988 Career Service Professional Examination (CSPE) on her behalf in Baguio City. Investigation revealed that the photograph attached to the examination seat plan for “Rita S. Chulyao” matched the photograph in Pangowon’s personal records, not Chulyao’s. The CSC formally charged Pangowon but dismissed the case against Chulyao for lack of jurisdiction, as she was a court employee, and forwarded the matter to the Office of the Court Administrator (OCA).
In her defense, Chulyao claimed the photo mix-up was inadvertent. She alleged she gave her sister’s photo to the proctor by mistake after a late arrival and confusion at a photo studio. She submitted an affidavit from a purported seatmate and documents to show her sister was teaching in their hometown on the exam date, arguing travel to Baguio would have been impossible. The OCA found her explanations unworthy of credence and recommended her dismissal.

ISSUE

Whether respondent Rita S. Chulyao is guilty of Dishonesty for having another person take the civil service examination in her place.

RULING

Yes, the Supreme Court found Chulyao guilty of Dishonesty and ordered her dismissal. The Court rejected her defense as a mere concoction. The clear evidence from the CSC showed the photograph on the exam records was of her sister, strongly indicating impersonation. Her story of a photo mix-up was illogical and unsupported, as it defied belief that she would accidentally submit another’s photo for a crucial identification document without verification. Her supporting affidavit and documents were deemed insufficient to overcome the direct photographic evidence.
The legal logic is grounded in the gravity of dishonesty in public service. By allegedly procuring her eligibility through fraud, Chulyay violated the trust integral to her position as a court employee. The Court emphasized that public office demands the highest standards of honesty. Dishonesty, as a grave offense under civil service rules, warrants dismissal even for a first offense to preserve the integrity of the judiciary and the civil service system. Her actions prejudiced the government by allowing her to secure appointment under false pretenses, justifying the penalty of dismissal with forfeiture of benefits and disqualification from re-employment.