A.M. No. P-04-1765. April 8, 2008.
JUDGE FELIPE G. BANZON, complainant, vs. RUBY B. HECHANOVA, Court Stenographer III, respondent.

FACTS

Judge Felipe G. Banzon of the RTC, Branch 69, Silay City, filed an administrative complaint against Court Stenographer III Ruby B. Hechanova for her continued refusal to transcribe stenographic notes, which hampered the promulgation of decisions. Despite repeated memoranda and orders from the judge, including warnings of contempt and arrest, Hechanova failed to comply. She submitted a letter of resignation in February 2001, citing unreasonable pressure, but the Office of the Court Administrator (OCA) noted that Administrative Circular No. 24-90 prohibits the resignation of stenographers without first transcribing all their notes.
The Supreme Court initially directed the NBI to arrest and detain Hechanova until she completed the transcriptions. Upon her plea for humanitarian consideration, the Court suspended the arrest order for 90 days, directing her to finish and submit transcripts for 74 hearings. She failed to comply within the extended period. Subsequent efforts by the NBI to locate her for arrest were unsuccessful, as she could not be found at her given address.

ISSUE

Whether respondent Ruby B. Hechanova is administratively liable for gross neglect of duty for her persistent failure to transcribe required stenographic notes.

RULING

Yes, the Supreme Court found respondent guilty of gross neglect of duty and dismissed her from the service. The legal logic is anchored on her violation of a fundamental duty under Section 17, Rule 136 of the Rules of Court and Administrative Circular No. 24-90, which mandates stenographers to transcribe notes within twenty days from their taking. Her obstinate refusal to comply with multiple judicial orders, including those from the Supreme Court, constituted a deliberate disregard of her essential role in the administration of justice.
The Court emphasized that the prompt transcription of stenographic notes is crucial to the speedy disposition of cases. By failing in this duty, Hechanova hampered judicial processes and eroded public confidence in the judiciary. Gross neglect of duty is a grave offense punishable by dismissal even for a first offense under the Revised Uniform Rules on Administrative Cases. Her subsequent evasion of arrest and failure to submit the required transcripts despite a final opportunity confirmed her culpability. The penalty of dismissal, with forfeiture of benefits and disqualification from re-employment in government, was imposed to uphold the integrity of judicial administration.