G.R. No. A.M. No. P-08-2571; August 27, 2009
SIMEON GUARIÑO, RESTITUTO GUARIÑO, ARNOLD CARAGUIAN, LIZARDO SARMIENTO, and PRESING SARMIENTO, Petitioners, vs. CESAR F. RAGSAC, SHERIFF IV, and TEOTIMO D. CRUZ, BRANCH CLERK OF COURT, both of RTC, Br. 75, San Mateo, Rizal, Respondents.

FACTS

Petitioners Simeon Guariño, et al., filed an administrative complaint against Sheriff Cesar F. Ragsac and Branch Clerk of Court Teotimo D. Cruz of the RTC, Branch 75, San Mateo, Rizal, for grave abuse of authority. The complaint stemmed from the implementation of a Writ of Execution in an ejectment case, which resulted in the demolition of petitioners’ houses erected on the subject land. Petitioners alleged that the demolition was conducted without a specific court order authorizing such action.
In their respective Comments, respondent Sheriff claimed he merely implemented the Writ of Execution as issued. Respondent Branch Clerk of Court asserted that he issued the Writ pursuant to a court order, in compliance with his ministerial duties.

ISSUE

Whether respondents are administratively liable for grave abuse of authority in implementing the Writ of Execution and causing the demolition of petitioners’ properties without a special order of demolition.

RULING

The Supreme Court found respondent Sheriff Cesar F. Ragsac GUILTY of grave abuse of authority (oppression) and SUSPENDED him for six months and one day. The case against respondent Branch Clerk of Court Teotimo D. Cruz was DISMISSED for lack of merit.
The Court, adopting the findings of the Office of the Court Administrator, held that Sheriff Ragsac committed a grave abuse of authority. The Writ of Execution he implemented only commanded the defendants to vacate the premises and surrender possession, pursuant to the ejectment decision. It did not contain any order for the demolition of improvements. Section 10(d), Rule 39 of the Rules of Court is explicit: when the property contains improvements by the judgment obligor, the sheriff shall not destroy, demolish, or remove them except upon a special order of the court. This order must be issued upon motion of the judgment obligee, after due hearing, and after the obligor fails to remove the improvements within a reasonable time fixed by the court. By proceeding with the demolition absent this mandatory special order, Sheriff Ragsac acted arbitrarily and oppressively, ignoring clear procedural safeguards designed to ensure justice and fair play.
In contrast, the charge against Clerk of Court Cruz failed. The evidence showed he issued the Writ of Execution pursuant to a court order, performing a purely ministerial duty. Petitioners presented no substantial evidence to prove he participated in or authorized the unlawful demolition. His act of issuing the writ with dispatch, in compliance with his duty, did not constitute grave abuse of authority.