G.R. No. A.M. No. P-02-1642, September 27, 2002
Violeta R. Villanueva, Clerk of Court, MTC, Sto. Tomas, La Union, Complainant, vs. Armando T. Milan, Utility Worker, MTC, Sto. Tomas, La Union, Respondent.

FACTS

Complainant Violeta R. Villanueva, Clerk of Court of the Municipal Trial Court (MTC) of Sto. Tomas, La Union, filed a verified Letter-Complaint dated June 11, 2001, charging respondent Armando T. Milan, Utility Worker of the same court, with immorality, insubordination, falsification of entries in the attendance logbook, habitual absenteeism, tardiness, and under-time. The charges included respondent’s refusal to perform duties like garbage disposal, shouting invectives at complainant, and displaying unbecoming outbursts. Respondent, a bachelor, admitted to a live-in relationship and siring two children, which complainant alleged was immoral. Complainant further accused respondent of habitual absenteeism, tardiness, and falsifying attendance logbook entries for July, August, September, and October 1999, December 2000, and January to March 2001, including superimposing entries on crossed-out spaces and failing to record tardy arrivals or early departures. Respondent also allegedly doctored his daily time records to conceal absences and his class schedule at Lyceum Northwestern University in Dagupan City.
In his verified Comment, respondent claimed the complaint was harassment, citing a prior administrative case he filed against complainant for using office supplies for her husband’s political campaign. He admitted the live-in relationship but explained both he and his partner were single and capacitated to marry, and the arrangement was to avoid prejudicing their U.S. immigration application. He denied unauthorized absences, tardiness, or under-time, asserting that complainant, as Clerk of Court II, signed and certified his daily time records. Regarding his classes, he claimed complainant encouraged his schooling and he had private arrangements with teachers to avoid conflict with work.
The case was referred to Executive Judge Clifton U. Ganay of the Regional Trial Court, Agoo, La Union, for investigation. Complainant and two witnesses (Court Interpreter and Court Stenographer) testified. Respondent stopped reporting for work in March 2002 without leave, as he reportedly left for the United States, and thus did not present evidence. Judge Ganay’s Report and Recommendation found respondent guilty of all charges and recommended dismissal with forfeiture of benefits, also noting his absence without official leave for five months.

ISSUE

Whether respondent Armando T. Milan is administratively liable for the charges of immorality, insubordination, falsification of entries in the attendance logbook, habitual absenteeism, tardiness, and under-time, warranting dismissal from service.

RULING

The Supreme Court found respondent administratively liable for conduct grossly prejudicial to the service, but modified the findings on specific charges. The Court held:
1. Immorality: Not substantiated. While respondent’s live-in relationship was admitted, it did not constitute immorality per se, as he and his partner were single and capacitated to marry. His position as Utility Worker did not require the high moral standard applied to officials in frequent public contact. However, the Court faulted respondent for using the relationship to gain advantage in his U.S. immigration application, revealing a deceptive and unprincipled character.
2. Falsification of Attendance Logbook: Not proven by substantial evidence. Complainant failed to provide corroborative evidence, such as daily time records, to show variances between logbook entries and actual attendance. Respondent’s allegation that complainant certified his daily time records further weakened the charge.
3. Habitual Absenteeism, Tardiness, and Under-time: Proven. A memorandum dated March 4, 2002, from MTC Judge Benjamin E. Almazan, required respondent to explain his absences in December 2001, January, and February 2002, which he failed to refute due to his absence from the proceedings. This constituted substantial evidence of habitual absenteeism.
4. Insubordination and Conduct Prejudicial to Service: Proven by respondent’s disregard of rules, including leaving the country without official leave and failing to resign properly. His actions demonstrated arrogance and indifference to public service demands.
5. Effect of Absence Without Leave: Respondent’s absence without official leave for over 30 days warranted his automatic dropping from the rolls under Civil Service rules, but did not render the case moot, as the Court retained jurisdiction to impose administrative penalties.
The Court emphasized that public office is a public trust, and all judiciary personnel must uphold integrity, honesty, and accountability. Respondent’s overall conduct was notoriously undesirable and prejudicial to the service.
DISPOSITIVE PORTION:
Respondent Armando T. Milan is DISMISSED from service effective immediately, with forfeiture of all benefits except accrued leave credits, and with prejudice to re-employment in any government branch or instrumentality. Due to his absence without official leave for over 30 days, he is also considered DROPPED from the roll of employees of the MTC, Sto. Tomas, La Union.