A.M. No. P-01-1475; October 17, 2003
JUDGE MANUEL R. AQUINO, complainant, vs. JOCELYN C. FERNANDEZ, Stenographer I, respondent.

FACTS

Judge Manuel R. Aquino of the Municipal Trial Court of Caba, La Union, filed an administrative complaint against his Stenographer I, Jocelyn C. Fernandez. The complaint stemmed from respondent’s failure to type a draft order in a criminal case on November 4, 1998, despite explicit instructions. When required to explain, Fernandez admitted the lapse, citing her preoccupation with preparing 18 copies of her daily time record and leave application. It was also noted that she was absent from November 4 to 6, 1998, without filing a prior leave of absence as mandated.
The complaint further revealed a pattern of prior infractions. Fernandez had been reprimanded in October 1993 by the Clerk of Court for an absence spent playing mahjong and for submitting late, error-filled stenographic notes. She was again reprimanded by Judge Aquino in November 1996 for unauthorized absences. The investigating judge, Judge Rose Mary R. Molina-Alim, found her guilty of simple neglect of duty, gross dishonesty for unauthorized absences, and serious misconduct, recommending a one-month suspension.

ISSUE

Whether respondent Jocelyn C. Fernandez is administratively liable for her infractions, and if so, what is the appropriate penalty.

RULING

Yes, respondent is administratively liable. The Supreme Court found her guilty of Simple Neglect of Duty, defined as the failure to give proper attention to a task expected of an employee, signifying a disregard of duty due to carelessness or indifference. Her failure to type the court order as directed constitutes this offense. Regarding the unauthorized absences, the Court clarified that while these were violations of civil service rules requiring prior leave application, they did not, under the circumstances, rise to the level of gross dishonesty or serious misconduct as found by the investigator. The Court noted the absences were not habitual or frequent.
In determining the penalty, the Court considered mitigating factors. Fernandez candidly admitted her faults, expressed remorse, and promised to reform, which were viewed as signs of repentance. While the prescribed penalty for simple neglect of duty is suspension for one month and one day to six months, the Court tempered justice with mercy. Applying its discretion under the Omnibus Civil Service Rules, the Court imposed a fine of Two Thousand Pesos (₱2,000.00) in lieu of suspension, with a stern warning that a repetition of the same or similar acts would be dealt with more severely.