G.R. No. RTJ-90-372-B and P-93-992 December 23, 1996
Court Employees of the Regional Trial Court, Branch 27, Gingoog City, complainants, vs. Judge Vivencio A. Galon, respondent. / Judge Vivencio A. Galon, complainant, vs. Fortunato Rail, respondent.

FACTS

Seven employees of RTC Branch 27, Gingoog City, filed an administrative complaint against Judge Vivencio A. Galon for oppression, dishonesty, misconduct, incompetence, and ignorance of the law. Judge Galon, then on temporary detail at the branch, denied the charges, attributing them to resentment over his efforts to curb employee tardiness. During the investigation, five complainants moved to dismiss the case. Judge Galon subsequently filed a counter-complaint against the sole remaining complainant, stenographic reporter Fortunato Rail, charging him with adultery, immorality, and perjury. This was docketed as a separate case and later consolidated. Judge Galon was later approved for retirement on disability, but a portion of his benefits was withheld pending the case’s outcome.

ISSUE

The primary issues were: (1) whether Judge Galon was administratively liable for the charges against him, and (2) whether Fortunato Rail was administratively liable for the charges in the counter-complaint.

RULING

The Court found Judge Galon liable only for conduct unbecoming a judicial officer. After a exhaustive review, the Investigating Justice found the voluminous evidence insufficient to substantiate the specific accusations of judicial misconduct, dishonesty, or incompetence. These pertained to matters like bond cancellations, book purchases, and case dismissals, which were within judicial discretion or were otherwise properly explained. However, the evidence conclusively established that Judge Galon improperly used his court chambers as his living quarters, displaying personal belongings like shoes and bedding, which demonstrated a lack of judicial decorum that diminished the court’s dignity. His use of intemperate and vile language in his pleadings further betrayed a lack of the restraint and judiciousness required of a magistrate.
Regarding Fortunato Rail, the Court found him liable for falsification and immoral conduct. The evidence showed that, prior to his entry into the judiciary, Rail cohabited with and fathered children with his uncle’s wife, Eufemia Valmoria. He falsified his voter’s registration by declaring they were married when they were not, and he concealed this relationship in his official personal data sheets. They only married after his uncle’s death. Such conduct involving moral turpitude rendered him unfit for court service, as court personnel must adhere to high ethical standards to preserve the integrity of the judiciary.
DISPOSITIVE
Judge Galon was fined P5,000.00, to be taken from the amount withheld from his retirement benefits. Fortunato Rail was fined P12,000.00, with a warning.