AM P 00 1396; (October, 2000) (Digest)
G.R. No. P-00-1396; October 24, 2000
Roberto R. Ignacio, complainant, vs. Rodolfo Payumo, Deputy Sheriff, Regional Trial Court, Quezon City, Branch 93, respondent.
FACTS
Complainant Roberto R. Ignacio charged respondent Deputy Sheriff Rodolfo Payumo with Grave Misconduct in relation to a land registration case. Ignacio alleged that Payumo, after receiving the amount of ₱40,000.00 to implement a writ of demolition, unjustifiably failed to execute the writ, causing him prejudice. Despite a demand letter, Payumo did not return the money.
In his defense, Payumo claimed he attempted to implement the writ but was met with violent resistance from the occupants. He further stated that the trial court later ordered him to hold proceedings pending a motion for reconsideration. He asserted the ₱40,000.00 was spent on legitimate expenses for the attempted demolition, including payments for personnel, surveillance, and service of notices.
ISSUE
Whether respondent Deputy Sheriff Rodolfo Payumo is administratively liable for misconduct in office for his handling of the writ of demolition and the funds received for its implementation.
RULING
Yes, respondent is guilty of Misconduct in Office. The Supreme Court agreed with the Court Administrator’s recommendation. The legal logic centers on the mandatory procedure for sheriffs in executing court processes and handling related expenses as prescribed by Section 9, Rule 141 of the Rules of Court. This rule requires the sheriff to estimate the expenses for implementing a writ, secure the court’s approval for these estimates, and have the interested party deposit the approved amount with the Clerk of Court. The sheriff must then liquidate the expenses and refund any unspent amount, with a full report submitted to the court.
Respondent Payumo admitted receiving ₱40,000.00 from the complainant. However, he failed to follow the prescribed procedure: he did not submit the estimated expenses for the court’s approval, nor did he ensure the deposit was made with the Clerk of Court. His failure to liquidate the amount or submit a proper report constituted a clear violation of the rules. The Court emphasized that sheriffs, as officers of the court, must adhere strictly to procedural rules to maintain the integrity of the judicial process. Accepting money directly from a party and failing to account for it is improper, even if allegedly spent for lawful purposes. For this misconduct, the Court imposed a fine of ₱5,000.00 with a stern warning.