THIRD DIVISION
[A.M. No. P-08-2522. January 22, 2014.]
JOEL FERRER, complainant, vs. REYNOR F. UBALDE, SHERIFF, IV, REGIONAL TRIAL COURT, BRANCH 38, DAET, CAMARINES NORTE, respondent.
NOTICE
Sirs/Mesdames :
Please take notice that the Court, Third Division, issued a Resolution dated January 22, 2014, which reads as follows:
"A.M. No. P-08-2522 (Joel Ferrer v. Reynor F. Ubalde, Sheriff, IV, Regional Trial Court, Branch 38, Daet, Camarines Norte). — On January 18, 2007 the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Daet, Camarines Norte, issued a writ of execution against Siegfredo Magana in Civil Case 7565, an action for ejectment. Considering that the writ was issued pending appeal, complainant Joel Ferrer made a request for Immediate Implementation of the writ and gave Sheriff Reynor F. Ubalde P3,000.00 for expenses.
On January 25, 2007 Sheriff Ubalde went to Barangay Del Carmen in Talisay, Camarines Norte, to serve a copy of the writ. With the Barangay Chairperson's assistance, Ubalde conferred with and explained to Magana the court order for him to vacate the subject property and turn over the same to Ferrer. Magana pleaded with Ubalde, however, to allow him to stay for two more months so he could harvest his crops. Ubalde did not agree and insisted that Magana leave the property. EaDATc
Sheriff Ubalde submitted his report to the RTC and later returned to the property to monitor Magana's compliance with the writ. He was surprised to find Magana and his family still there. They even threatened him with harm. Ubalde left and prepared another report to the RTC on March 21, 2007 with a recommendation for the issuance of a writ of demolition. On August 14, 2007 the RTC issued an Order directing Magana to explain why he should not be cited for and held in contempt for disobeying its order. On September 17, 2007 Magana filed a manifestation stating that he had already left the property.
On October 8, 2007 complainant Ferrer charged Sheriff Ubalde before this Court with gross dereliction of duty and gross incompetence in failing to enforce the writ of execution that the RTC issued. In his Comment, Ubalde claimed that it can hardly be said that he was incompetent and remiss in the performance of his duties because he did not cease in his efforts to enforce the subject writ of execution.
On June 06, 2008 1 the Office of the Court Administrator (OCA) recommended the re-docketing of Ferrer's complaint against Sheriff Ubalde into a regular administrative matter and the imposition on him of a fine equivalent to one month salary for simple neglect of duty. In its Resolution 2 of January 19, 2009, the Court caused the re-docketing of the case and required the parties to state whether they were submitting the same on the basis of the pleadings filed. Since Sheriff Ubalde failed to comply, on August 22, 2011 the Court considered the case submitted for resolution based on the pleadings filed. 3
Court sheriffs have the duty to implement with speed and efficiency the writs that courts issue. 4 Indeed, as agents of the law, sheriffs play an important role in the administration of justice and in this, high standards are expected of them. 5 Here, it is apparent that Sheriff Ubalde did not see the urgency of causing the removal of Magana from the subject property. When confronted by resistance, he did not assert his authority, walked away, and left the premises. IEHSDA
Although Sheriff Ubalde later on returned and found that Magana did not yet vacate the place, be desisted from implementing the writ when Magana's wife showed token resistance and threatened him. Sheriff Ubalde should have exerted every possible effort, with police assistance if needed, to enforce the court's judgment because a decision left unexecuted or long delayed would amount to an empty victory on the prevailing party's part.
Sheriff Ubalde failed to show the diligence and zeal required of him in the performance of his duties. The Court cannot countenance this. Being on the front-line of the justice system, he should show no fear or allow himself to be cowed when implementing court orders. He is guilty of simple neglect of duty under the Revised Uniform Rules on Administrative Cases. As a less grave offense, his offense carries the penalty of suspension for one month and one day to six months for the first offense and dismissal for the second offense. Considering, however, that this is his first offense, the Court deems it sufficient to impose on him a fine of P5,000.00.
WHEREFORE, the Court FINDS respondent Reynor F. Ubalde, Sheriff IV, Regional Trial Court, Branch 38, Daet, Camarines Norte, GUILTY of Simple Neglect of Duty and IMPOSES on him a fine of P5,000.00 with stern warning that a repetition of the same or similar act in the future shall be dealt with more severely.
Let a copy of this Decision be attached to the personnel record of respondent Sheriff Ubalde in the Office of the Administrative Services, Office of the Court Administrator.
SO ORDERED." CSHcDT
Very truly yours,
(SGD.) LUCITA ABJELINA SORIANODivision Clerk of Court
Footnotes
1. Rollo, p. 60.
2. Id. at 63.
3. Id. at 92.
4. Judge Balanag, Jr. v. Osita, 437 Phil. 452, 455 (2002).
5. Mariñas v. Florendo, A.M. No. P-07-2304, February 12, 2009, 578 SCRA 502, 510.