SECOND DIVISION
[A.M. No. RTJ-21-2609. January 27, 2021.][Formerly OCA IPI No. 17-4699-RTJ]
TAN TIONG BIO A.K.A. 'HENRY TAN', complainant,vs. HON. BIBIANO G. COLASITO, PRESIDING JUDGE, REGIONAL TRIAL COURT OF MANILA, BRANCH 50, respondent.
NOTICE
Sirs/Mesdames :
Please take notice that the Court, Second Division, issued a Resolution dated 27 January 2021which reads as follows:
"A.M. No. RTJ-21-2609 [Formerly OCA IPI No. 17-4699-RTJ] (Tan Tiong Bio a.k.a. 'Henry Tan' v. Hon. Bibiano G. Colasito, Presiding Judge, Regional Trial Court of Manila, Branch 50). — The Court resolves to NOTE the (a) complaint 1 dated April 26, 2017 or Tan Tiong Bio a.k.a. 'Henry Tan' (complainant), against Presiding Judge Bibiano G. Colasito, Regional Trial Court (RTC), Manila, Branch 50 (respondent Judge); (b) comment 2 dated August 18, 2017 of respondent Judge; (c) reply-affidavit 3 dated September 7, 2017 or complainant; and (d) rejoinder 4 dated September 26, 2017 of respondent Judge. HTcADC
The Court further RESOLVES to ADOPT and APPROVE the findings of fact, conclusions of law, and recommendation of the Office of the Court Administrator in the attached Report and Recommendation 5 dated August 14, 2020. Accordingly, (a) the administrative complaint against respondent Judge is RE-DOCKETED as a regular administrative matter; and (b) respondent is found GUILTY of Undue Delay in resolving the Motion for Issuance of Writ of Demolition 6 and Motion to Expunge the Motion for Reconsideration 7 in Civil Case No. 98-91253, and is ADMONISHED with a STERN WARNING that a repetition or the same or similar offense shall be dealt with more severely. 8
It is settled that judges have the duty to administer justice without delay. As a frontline official of the Judiciary, a trial judge should, at all times, maintain professional competence and observe the high standards of public service and fidelity. His dedication to duty is the least he could do to sustain the public's trust and confidence not only in him but more importantly in the institution he represents. 9 Nevertheless, considering the absence of bad faith or malice on the part of respondent Judge, and the lack of my record or previous administrative sanctions against him, it is proper to only admonish respondent Judge for his failure to act promptly on complainant's motions. 10 CAIHTE
SO ORDERED. (Lopez, J., J., designated additional member per Special Order No. 2813 dated January 26, 2021)."
By authority of the Court:
(SGD.) TERESITA AQUINO TUAZONDivision Clerk of Court
Footnotes
1.Rollo. pp. 1-10.
2.Id. at 81-105.
3.Id. at 231-246.
4.Id. at 262-275.
5.Id. at 306-318.
6.Id. at 115-119.
7.Id. at 207-213.
8.Id. at 317-318.
9. See Rapsing v. Walse-Lutero, 808 Phil. 389-407 (2017).
10.Rollo, p. 317.