G.R. No. A.M. No. 1041 August 26, 1977
ELVIGIO PASCUAL, complainant, vs. ANTONIO MARIÑAS, ET AL., respondents.

FACTS

Complainant Elvigio Pascual, a prevailing party in an ejectment case before the Municipal Court of Mandaluyong, Rizal, sought the assistance of the Provincial Sheriff’s Office for the execution of the judgment. He was attended to by Deputy Sheriff Antonio Mariñas, to whom he paid the official execution fee of P4.40. Subsequently, complainant alleged that Sheriff Guard Efren Paulino, in Mariñas’s presence, demanded an additional P4.40 and the sum of P300.00. During the actual execution, only Paulino was present, and an electric stove was levied upon, leading the judgment debtor to file a complaint for illegal execution with the DPI-PIAU Malacañang. Pascual further claimed that Mariñas later asked him to falsely testify that Mariñas was present during the execution.
In his answer, respondent Mariñas denied knowledge of the alleged extortion of P300.00 and the additional P4.40. He asserted that the electric stove was not levied upon but was the subject of a prior contract of pledge. He also stated that the judgment had been satisfied, as the premises were vacated and possession restored to Pascual. The complaint against Paulino was not formally endorsed, as he was not a regular court employee.

ISSUE

Whether respondent Deputy Sheriff Antonio Mariñas is administratively liable for his actions in connection with the execution of the judgment.

RULING

Yes, respondent Mariñas is administratively liable. The Court found that the principal charge of unlawful delegation of duty was substantiated. Mariñas, in his answer, did not deny the core allegation that he delegated the execution of the writ in Civil Case No. 5643 to Sheriff Guard Efren Paulino. A sheriff has a ministerial duty to personally execute court processes; this duty cannot be lawfully delegated to a non-deputy or an unauthorized person like a sheriff guard. By failing to personally oversee the execution, Mariñas neglected his official responsibility, which constitutes a breach of duty warranting disciplinary action.
The Court deemed an investigation unnecessary as the respondent’s own pleading admitted the crucial fact of delegation. While the extortion charges involving specific sums were contested and required further proof, the admitted failure to perform a personal duty was sufficient grounds for liability. The act of delegating a core official function undermines the integrity of the judicial process and the office of the sheriff. Accordingly, the Court suspended Deputy Sheriff Antonio Mariñas from office for one month without pay, with a stern warning against future infractions.