AM RTJ 02 1704; (March, 2003) (Digest)
A.M. No. RTJ-02-1704. March 18, 2003. OFFICE OF THE COURT ADMINISTRATOR, complainant, vs. JUDGE TOMAS B. NOYNAY, Regional Trial Court, Branch 23, Allen, Northern Samar, respondent.
FACTS
This administrative case originated from a certification by Judge Salvador L. Infante, who reported that his predecessor, respondent Judge Tomas B. Noynay, left 56 criminal and civil cases undecided upon his optional retirement. Judge Noynay had served as the regular presiding judge of the RTC of Laoang, Branch 21, and concurrently as the acting presiding judge of the RTC of Allen, Branch 23. Upon assuming his post, Judge Infante inventoried the inherited caseload and confirmed the backlog. In his defense, Judge Noynay submitted an explanation citing several reasons for the delay, including a heavy workload inherited from a prior judge, an extensive judicial district, intermittent electrical brownouts, health problems and eye surgeries, and occasional mental blackouts.
ISSUE
Whether respondent Judge Tomas B. Noynay is administratively liable for undue delay in rendering decisions or judgments.
RULING
Yes, the Supreme Court found Judge Noynay guilty of gross inefficiency for undue delay. The constitutional mandate and the Code of Judicial Conduct require judges to decide cases within 90 days from submission. The Court emphasized that delay erodes public faith in the judiciary. While the Court acknowledges that valid hindrances like health or heavy caseload may occur, it is incumbent upon the judge to request a formal extension of time from the Court through the Office of the Court Administrator. Judge Noynay failed to file any such request, making his explanations unacceptable. This was his second infraction for the same offense. Considering his retirement, the penalty was modified from the OCA’s recommended P25,000 fine. For this less serious charge under Rule 140 of the Rules of Court, the Court imposed a fine of P20,000.00, to be deducted from the portion of his retirement benefits previously ordered withheld. The ruling underscores that judges must manage their dockets diligently and seek extensions when necessary to avoid administrative sanctions.