Verano-Sevilla v. De Jesus

SECOND DIVISION

[A.M. No. P-20-4064. July 27, 2020.]

NOEME VERANO-SEVILLA, complainant,vs. MAY ANN P. DE JESUS, LEGAL RESEARCHER II, REGIONAL TRIAL COURT (RTC), BRANCH 26, MANILA, respondent.

[A.M. No. P-20-4065. July 27, 2020.]

MARY ANN REYES DE JESUS, complainant,vs. COURT STENOGRAPHER III NOEME VERANO-SEVILLA, RTC, BRANCH 8, MANILA, respondent.

NOTICE

Sirs/Mesdames :

Please take notice that the Court, Second Division, issued a Resolution dated27 July 2020which reads as follows:

"(A.M. No. P-20-4064 [Formerly OCA IPI No. 15-4517-P] (Noeme Verano-Sevilla vs. May Ann P. De Jesus, Legal Researcher II, Regional Trial Court (RTC), Branch 26, Manila); and A.M. No. P-20-4065 [Formerly OCA IPI No. 16-4539-P] (Mary Ann Reyes De Jesus vs. Court Stenographer III Noeme Verano-Sevilla, RTC, Branch 8, Manila). — The consolidated administrative cases stemmed from (1) the Complaint 1 for Grave Misconduct dated December 10, 2015 filed by Noeme Verano-Sevilla (Verano-Sevilla), former Court Stenographer II of the Office of the Clerk of Court, RTC Manila, against Mary Ann P. De Jesus (De Jesus), Legal Researcher II of RTC Manila, Branch 26; and (2) the Complaint 2 filed by De Jesus against Verano-Sevilla dated February 2, 2016 for the latter's alleged Dishonesty, Grave Misconduct, Gross Insubordination, Abandonment of Work, Unauthorized Absences, and Conduct Unbecoming a Government Employee.

In the Report 3 dated June 10, 2019, Executive Judge Virgilio V. Macaraig (Executive Judge Macaraig) submitted the results of his investigation; he recommended that Verano-Sevilla and De Jesus shall each be held liable for Conduct Unbecoming a Court Employee which amounts to Simple Misconduct. Executive Judge Macaraig explained:

After evaluating the respective testimonies and documentary exhibits of the parties, the undersigned finds that both parties, being complainants and respondents of each other, are guilty of Conduct Unbecoming a Court Employee, they having showed unpleasant behavior towards each other, during office hours, inside the premises of the Office of the Clerk of Court.

There is no dispute that Sevilla slapped De Jesus and this act was witnessed by their co-employees. On the other hand, it was admitted by De Jesus herself that she slapped Sevilla back as a form of retaliation. 4

Executive Judge Macaraig elucidated that Simple Misconduct carries the penalty of suspension of one month and one day without pay with a stern warning that a repetition of the same infraction in the future shall be dealt with more severely.

Executive Judge Macaraig, also explained that since Verano-Sevilla already resigned from her job effective February 28, 2019, 5 the penalty of fine in an amount equivalent to her one-month salary shall instead be meted out against her, to be deducted from whatever benefits she may be entitled to.

The Office of the Court Administrator (OCA) adopted Executive Judge Macaraig's findings of fact and accepted his recommendation. 6

The Court agrees with the OCA.

In a long line of cases, the Court has ruled that fighting within office premises during office hours is considered simple misconduct. 7 Verily, Verano-Sevilla's act of slapping De Jesus and the latter's act of slapping back Verano-Sevilla, while in the performance of their official duties, fall within the ambit of simple misconduct for which they must be held equally liable.

Anent the complaint against Verano-Sevilla, De Jesus contends that Verano-Sevilla's failure to follow the orders of her immediate superior to report to his office and work after the incident constitutes insubordination, abandonment of work, and unauthorized absences.

Verano-Sevilla explained that she failed to follow the directive of her immediate superior to report to his office after the incident because she submitted herself to medical examination; and that she reported the incident to the police. Verano-Sevilla clarified that her desire to institute a criminal complaint against De Jesus was the reason for her absence for several days.

It is true that for one to be liable of insubordination, there must be a willful disregard of the lawful order of a superior officer. Here, while Verano-Sevilla willfully disregarded the lawful order of her superior officer, her reasons for doing so were valid. Verano-Sevilla attended to her injury and sought redress for her grievances. As aptly ratiocinated by the OCA, Verano-Sevilla was entitled to the remedies as a matter of right. Thus, the Court finds De Jesus' Complaint 8 to be without merit.

There being the aggravating circumstance of commission of the offense within court premises during office hours, and the presence of two mitigating circumstances at bar, namely: first offense and length of service, Verano-Sevilla being seventeen (17) years in the service, and De Jesus' tenureship of ten (10) years, one mitigating circumstance may be appreciated for each party. Thus, pursuant to Section 54 of the 2017 Rules on Administrative Cases in the Civil Service (RACCS), where there is one mitigating circumstance present, and no aggravating circumstance, the minimum of the penalty shall be imposed upon Verano-Sevilla and De Jesus.

All told, for fighting within court premises during office hours, the Court agrees with the OCA finding Verano-Sevilla and De Jesus each liable for Conduct Unbecoming a Court Employee amounting to Simple Misconduct. Hence, the Court adopts OCA's recommendation of suspension for a period of one month and one day against both De Jesus and Verano-Sevilla.

However, since Verano-Sevilla had already resigned from the service effective February 28, 2019, the penalty of FINE equivalent to her one month and one day salary is imposed against her in lieu of her suspension, pursuant to the guidelines for the penalty of FINE prescribed in Rule 10, Section 52 (2) of the 2017 RACCS.

WHEREFORE, the Court finds Mary Ann P. De Jesus and Noeme Verano-Sevilla both GUILTY of Simple Misconduct. Mary Ann P. De Jesus is SUSPENDED from work for a period of one month and one day, with a STERN WARNING that a commission of the same or similar act shall be dealt with more severely. In view of Noeme Verano-Sevilla's resignation effective February 28, 2019, she is instead ORDERED to pay a FINE equivalent to her one month and one day salary at the rate prevailing at the time of her resignation. The FINE shall be deducted from her accrued leave credits or other monetary benefits that she may be entitled to in view of her resignation.

SO ORDERED."

Very truly yours,

(SGD.) TERESITA AQUINO TUAZONDeputy Division Clerk of Court

 

Footnotes

1.Rollo, pp. 385-387, OCA IPI No. 15-4517-P, Vol. 2.

2.Rollo, pp. 1-12, OCA IPI No. 16-4539-P.

3.Rollo, pp. 702-707, of OCA IPI No. 15-4517-P, Vol-2.

4.Id. at 707.

5.Id. at 700.

6.Id. at 710-715.

7. See Abulencia v. Hermosisima, A.M. No. SB-13-20-P (Resolution), (June 26, 2013), 712 Phil. 248-254 (2013).

8.Rollo, p. 385.