AM P 96 1178; (February, 1996) (Digest)
G.R. No. P-96-1178. February 6, 1996
JUDGE ANICETO A. LIRIOS, complainant, vs. SALVADOR P. OLIVEROS, Clerk of Court, Municipal Trial Court, Naval, Biliran, respondent.
FACTS
Judge Aniceto A. Lirios filed an administrative complaint against his Clerk of Court, Salvador P. Oliveros, for irregularities. The first charge involved Oliveros’s failure to properly account for and deposit consignation payments totaling P49,500.00 in two civil cases for illegal detainer. He issued only temporary receipts and kept the funds in his personal vault. A certification from the Municipal Treasurer confirmed no deposits were made. The second charge concerned Oliveros requisitioning office equipment, including typewriters and fans, from the Supreme Court without the judge’s consent and retaining most items at his residence. An audit also revealed his delayed remittance of Judiciary Development Fund (JDF) collections.
In his defense, Oliveros claimed the use of ordinary receipts for consignation followed Regional Trial Court practice. He asserted he kept collections secure and deposited them post-audit. Regarding the equipment, he stated he acted on verbal instructions and that the OIC Clerk failed to retrieve the items from his house.
ISSUE
Whether respondent Clerk of Court Salvador P. Oliveros is administratively liable for his actions concerning fiduciary funds, JDF collections, and government property.
RULING
Yes, the Supreme Court found respondent guilty of grave misconduct. His explanations were unsatisfactory and demonstrated a whimsical and abusive conduct prejudicial to public service. By failing to issue official receipts and immediately deposit consignation funds—which are trust funds—with an authorized government depository, he violated Supreme Court Circular No. 13-92 and breached his fiduciary duty as a cashier. His practice of retaining collections until after an audit was a direct contravention of the circular requiring immediate deposit.
His undue delay in remitting JDF collections constituted grave misfeasance. Furthermore, his prolonged retention of requisitioned government equipment in his personal residence gave rise to a reasonable suspicion of intent to appropriate them for personal use, undermining public trust. The Court emphasized that every court employee must act with utmost responsibility, as a public office is a public trust. His actions diminished faith in the judiciary. The Court imposed a fine of P10,000.00 with a stern warning.