A.M. No. P-12-3070. March 11, 2014.
CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION, Complainant, vs. NENITA C. LONGOS, Clerk II, Municipal Circuit Trial Court, Del Carmen-Numancia-San Isidro-San Benito, Surigao del Norte, Respondent.

FACTS

1. On October 25, 2002, the Civil Service Commission (CSC) received a letter from a concerned citizen alleging that respondent Nenita C. Longos, a Clerk II at the Municipal Circuit Trial Court, asked another person to take the 1992 Civil Service Professional Examination for her under Examination No. 342620, resulting in a fraudulent rating of 86.10%.
2. The CSC investigated by comparing Longos’s Personal Data Sheet (PDS), appointment papers, Examinee Attendance Sheet, and Picture-Seat Plan (PSP). It found a patent dissimilarity between the photographs on her PDS and her PSP.
3. The CSC required Longos to submit counter-statements and attend a conference, but she failed to appear despite several resettings. The CSC then formally charged her with dishonesty.
4. On January 21, 2010, the CSC referred the administrative case to the Office of the Court Administrator (OCA) pursuant to the Supreme Court’s administrative supervision over court personnel.
5. During the OCA proceedings, Longos repeatedly failed to file her comment despite directives. Consequently, her case was deemed submitted for evaluation.
6. The OCA, in its Memorandum dated March 30, 2012, found the photographic discrepancy between the PDS and PSP as unrefuted evidence. It recommended her dismissal from service with forfeiture of retirement benefits (except accrued leave credits) and perpetual disqualification from re-employment in government.

ISSUE

Whether respondent Nenita C. Longos is guilty of dishonesty for fraudulently securing her civil service eligibility by having another person take the 1992 Civil Service Professional Examination on her behalf.

RULING

The Supreme Court ADOPTED the findings and recommendation of the OCA, finding respondent GUILTY OF DISHONESTY.
1. The Court found substantial evidence, based on the uncontested and starkly different photographs in Longos’s PDS and PSP, that she procured her eligibility through fraud by having another person take the examination for her.
2. The act of fraudulently securing an appointment constitutes dishonesty, defined as intentionally making a false statement on a material fact or practicing deception in securing an examination or appointment. Dishonesty is a serious offense that reflects moral decay and has no place in the judiciary, which demands the highest standard of moral righteousness.
3. The Court cited consistent jurisprudence (e.g., Cruz v. Civil Service Commission, Civil Service Commission v. Sta. Ana) where dismissal was imposed for the same fraudulent scheme uncovered through photographic comparison between PSP and PDS.
4. The Court emphasized that all court personnel are sentinels of justice expected to refrain from impropriety under the Code of Conduct for Court Personnel. Respondent’s act violated this standard and undermined the integrity of the judiciary.
5. Applying the penalties under the Revised Uniform Rules on Administrative Cases in the Civil Service, the Court DISMISSED Nenita C. Longos from service with FORFEITURE OF ALL RETIREMENT BENEFITS (except accrued leave credits) and with PREJUDICE TO RE-EMPLOYMENT in any government agency, including government-owned or controlled corporations. A copy of the decision was ordered attached to her records.