A.M. No. RTJ-08-2109; April 30, 2008
Office of the Court Administrator vs. Judge Moises M. Pardo and Clerk of Court Jessie W. Tuldague

FACTS

This administrative case originated from a letter-complaint dated August 9, 2005, filed by Executive Judge Moises M. Pardo of the RTC of Cabarroguis, Quirino, against Clerk of Court Atty. Jessie W. Tuldague. Judge Pardo alleged that Tuldague committed grave and disrespectful conduct by issuing a notice for a raffle of cases addressed only to the OIC-Branch Clerks of Court, with the judge merely furnished a copy. The judge contended this was an affront to his prerogatives as Executive Judge. Tuldague, in his Comment, denied any disrespect, stating he had used the same notice format for years without objection. He also filed a counter-charge against Judge Pardo, alleging the judge improperly ordered the direct withdrawal of a land registration case’s records without a raffle.
Subsequently, the Office of the Court Administrator (OCA) received copies of a heated exchange of letters between the respondents in October 2005. Tuldague’s letter criticized Judge Pardo for refusing to sign a Sheriff’s Certificate of Sale from an extra-judicial foreclosure raffle conducted in the judge’s absence, claiming the absence did not invalidate the sale. Judge Pardo’s reply cited Supreme Court Circulars, emphasizing that such raffles must be under the supervision of the Executive Judge, with the Clerk of Court only in an assistive role.

ISSUE

Whether respondents Judge Moises M. Pardo and Clerk of Court Jessie W. Tuldague are administratively liable for their respective actions and conduct.

RULING

The Court dismissed the complaint against Judge Pardo. The charge concerning the direct withdrawal of case records was unsubstantiated, as the OCA found the case was already assigned to his branch. Regarding the extra-judicial foreclosure raffle, his insistence on proper procedure was correct, as Circular No. 7-2002 indeed mandates the Executive Judge’s supervision.
However, the Court found Clerk of Court Jessie W. Tuldague administratively liable on two counts. First, for violating Supreme Court Circular No. 7-2002 by conducting the raffle of extra-judicial foreclosure applications without the required supervision of the Executive Judge. His act of proceeding alone constituted insubordination and warranted a reprimand. Second, for gross discourtesy in the course of official duties, evident from the disrespectful and confrontational tone of his October 18, 2005 letter to Judge Pardo. Such conduct erodes public confidence in the judiciary. While the prescribed penalty for a first offense is suspension, the Court imposed a fine equivalent to one month and one day’s salary to avoid disruption of court services.