G.R. No.: A.M. No. 2011-05-SC; September 6, 2011
Case Parties/Title: Re: Deceitful Conduct of Ignacio S. del Rosario, Cash Clerk III, Records and Miscellaneous Matter Section, Checks Disbursement Division, FMO-OCA.

FACTS

On April 19, 2011, the Office of the Court Administrator (OCA) received a letter-complaint dated April 6, 2011, from Noel G. Primo, a retired sheriff. Primo accused Ignacio S. del Rosario, a Cash Clerk III in the Supreme Court’s Fiscal Management Office-OCA, of dishonesty, grave abuse of trust, and conduct prejudicial to a civil servant. Primo stated that Del Rosario, a friend, offered to help him settle his financial liability with the Court to process his retirement papers. On November 3, 2010, Primo entrusted ₱34,000.00 to Del Rosario, with an agreement that ₱32,421.43 would be paid to the Court’s cashier and the remainder would be Del Rosario’s service fee. From December 2010 to January 2011, Del Rosario misrepresented that he was processing Primo’s retirement papers with the GSIS and blamed the GSIS for delays. Primo later discovered his papers were still with the Supreme Court and that Del Rosario had not paid his liability. Despite repeated demands, Del Rosario did not return the ₱32,421.43.
In his Comment, Del Rosario admitted receiving the ₱34,000.00 but claimed he used the money for his son’s hospitalization. He later asserted he raised funds and fully paid Primo’s liability. Del Rosario asked for the complaint to be considered settled, and Primo manifested his desistance due to the restitution.

ISSUE

Whether respondent Ignacio S. del Rosario is administratively liable for his actions, and if so, what is the appropriate penalty.

RULING

The Supreme Court AGREED with the Office of Administrative Services (OAS) findings that Del Rosario’s actions constituted Dishonesty and Conduct Prejudicial to the Best Interest of the Service but MODIFIED the recommended penalty.
The Court found that Del Rosario committed dishonesty, defined as a disposition to lie, cheat, deceive, or defraud, by misappropriating the entrusted funds and making misrepresentations to cover it up. His actions also constituted conduct prejudicial to the best interest of the service, as they violated public accountability and diminished public faith in the Judiciary. He further violated the Code of Conduct for Court Personnel by performing work outside his official duties (accepting money to process retirement papers) and failing to return the excess amount from the entrusted sum.
Under the Revised Uniform Rules on Administrative Cases in the Civil Service, both offenses are grave. Dishonesty is punishable by dismissal for the first offense. Conduct prejudicial to the best interest of the service is punishable by suspension for six months and one day to one year for the first offense. Applying Section 55 of the Rules, the penalty for the most serious charge (dismissal for dishonesty) is imposed, with the other offense as an aggravating circumstance.
The Court rejected the OAS’s recommendation of a six-month suspension and imposed the supreme penalty. It did not consider Del Rosario’s admissions, his reason for misappropriation (son’s hospitalization), the restitution made, or Primo’s desistance as mitigating factors. The restitution was not voluntary but motivated by fear of sanction, and the desistance is immaterial as the case involves public interest. As an employee of the Judiciary, Del Rosario failed to uphold the highest standards of integrity and betrayed the trust of a court employee, tarnishing the Court’s image.
PENALTY: Ignacio S. del Rosario is DISMISSED from the service with forfeiture of all retirement benefits, except accrued leave credits, and with perpetual disqualification from re-employment in any government agency.