February 2007 - Philippine Supreme Court Resolutions
Philippine Supreme Court Resolutions
Philippine Supreme Court Resolutions > Year 2007 > February 2007 Resolutions >
[A.M. No. 07-1-18-RTC : February 07, 2007] RE: ABSENCE WITHOUT OFFICIAL LEAVE [AWOL] OF MS. MARIETTA P. ESPINAS :
[A.M. No. 07-1-18-RTC : February 07, 2007]
RE: ABSENCE WITHOUT OFFICIAL LEAVE [AWOL] OF MS. MARIETTA P. ESPINAS
SIRS/MESDAMES:
Quoted hereunder, for your information, is a resolution of this Court dated 7 February 2007:
A.M. No. 07-1-18-RTC - (RE: ABSENCE WITHOUT OFFICIAL LEAVE [AWOL] OF MS. MARIETTA P. ESPINAS)
Before this Court is a Report dated 12 December 2006 of the Office of the Court Administrator (OCA) recommending, among others, the dropping from the rolls of Marietta P. Espinas (Espinas), Legal Researcher II, Regional Trial Court (RTC), Branch 8, Legazpi City, for the latter's continued absence without official leave (AWOL) from 14 November 2005 up to the present.
In a letter dated 5 January 2006,[1] Honorable Cezar A. Bordeos, Presiding Judge, RTC, Branch 8, Legazpi City, informed the OCA Leave Division that Espinas has been on AWOL since 14 November 2005. On 6 March 2006, Caridad A. Pabello, OCA Chief of Office, Administrative Services requested Judge Bordeos to cause the service of a warning letter to Espinas, requiring her to explain in writing her unauthorized absences or else the OCA will be constrained to recommend that she be dropped from the rolls.[2] Said warning letter was served upon Espinas through her husband, Agustin Espinas, on 15 March 2006.[3]
In a letter[4] dated 23 March 2006, Espinas admitted that she failed to file her leave application for the period 14 November to 16 December 2005 through inadvertence; that she filed her leave application for the period 19 December 2005 to 28 February 2006 but Judge Bordeos refused to sign the same because, according to him, it will contradict his earlier report that she has retired effective 18 January 2006; and that she made a blunder when she informed Judge Bordeos that she will apply for optional retirement effective 18 January 2006, a matter which Judge Bordeos immediately reported to this Court; and that she changed her retirement date and extended it to 28 February 2006 because of financial problems. Espinas attached her application letter for optional retirement.[5]
Upon verification from the Employees Welfare and Benefits Division, it was revealed that Espinas had, indeed, applied for optional retirement effective 28 February 2006. However, she has not complied with any of the requirements.
Citing Sec. 63, Rule XVI of the Omnibus Rules on Leave, amended by Resolution No. 99-1885 dated 23 August 1999, the OCA made the following recommendations:
We sustain the recommendations of the OCA.
It must be emphasized that Espinas has been on AWOL since 14 November 2005, a period of more than twenty-six (26) months. Under Section 63, Rule XVI of the Civil Service Rules, as amended, "an official or employee who is continually absent without an approved leave for as least (30) calendar days shall be considered on absence without official leave (AWOL) and shall be separated from the service or dropped from the rolls without prior notice."
In the case at bar, no application for leave was submitted by Espinas prior to her being absent. According to Judge Bordeos, she presented her applications for leave only on February 2006, weeks after Judge Bordeos reported her being on AWOL for more than thirty (30) days. Indeed, a perusal of one of the vacation leave application forms she submitted would show that the same is undated and unacted upon.[6]
It is well to remind employees applying for vacation leave, that they, whenever possible, must submit in advance their application for leave. This requirement must be complied with assiduously "its purpose being undoubtedly to enable the management to make the necessary adjustment in order that the work may not be paralyzed" or hampered.[7]
Verily, an employee's frequent unauthorized absences not only undermine his efficiency as court personnel, but can also have an adverse effect in the prompt delivery of justice.[8] A court employee's absence without leave for a prolonged and unreasonable period of time constitutes conduct prejudicial to the best interest of public service.[9] It contravenes a public servant's duty to serve the public with utmost responsibility, integrity, loyalty and efficiency. By going on AWOL, Espinas failed to adhere to the highest standards of public accountability imposed on those in government service.[10]
The Court notes that respondent even failed to submit her bundy cards for the month of November up to the present. Thus, on 5 June 2006, in A.M. No. 06-3-212, this Court resolved to withhold the salaries and benefits of Espinas until the bundy cards are submitted.[11] This failure on the Espinas indicates a propensity to neglect her administrative duties.
The conduct and behavior of all court personnel is laden with the heavy burden of responsibility. This Court will not allow any act or omission on the part of those involved in the administration of justice which violates the norm of public accountability and diminishes or tends to diminish the faith of the people in the judiciary.[12]
WHEREFORE, premises considered, the Court hereby RESOLVES, as recommended by the Office of the Court Administrator to:
(1) drop Marietta P. Espinas, Legal Researcher II, regional Trial Court (RTC), Branch 8, Legazpi City, from the rolls;
(2) Declare her position vacant.
The OCA is hereby DIRECTED to INFORM Marietta P. Espinas of her dropping from the rolls at her address appearing in her 201 files, that is, at San Agustin, Canaman, Camarines Sur.
A.M. No. 07-1-18-RTC - (RE: ABSENCE WITHOUT OFFICIAL LEAVE [AWOL] OF MS. MARIETTA P. ESPINAS)
Before this Court is a Report dated 12 December 2006 of the Office of the Court Administrator (OCA) recommending, among others, the dropping from the rolls of Marietta P. Espinas (Espinas), Legal Researcher II, Regional Trial Court (RTC), Branch 8, Legazpi City, for the latter's continued absence without official leave (AWOL) from 14 November 2005 up to the present.
In a letter dated 5 January 2006,[1] Honorable Cezar A. Bordeos, Presiding Judge, RTC, Branch 8, Legazpi City, informed the OCA Leave Division that Espinas has been on AWOL since 14 November 2005. On 6 March 2006, Caridad A. Pabello, OCA Chief of Office, Administrative Services requested Judge Bordeos to cause the service of a warning letter to Espinas, requiring her to explain in writing her unauthorized absences or else the OCA will be constrained to recommend that she be dropped from the rolls.[2] Said warning letter was served upon Espinas through her husband, Agustin Espinas, on 15 March 2006.[3]
In a letter[4] dated 23 March 2006, Espinas admitted that she failed to file her leave application for the period 14 November to 16 December 2005 through inadvertence; that she filed her leave application for the period 19 December 2005 to 28 February 2006 but Judge Bordeos refused to sign the same because, according to him, it will contradict his earlier report that she has retired effective 18 January 2006; and that she made a blunder when she informed Judge Bordeos that she will apply for optional retirement effective 18 January 2006, a matter which Judge Bordeos immediately reported to this Court; and that she changed her retirement date and extended it to 28 February 2006 because of financial problems. Espinas attached her application letter for optional retirement.[5]
Upon verification from the Employees Welfare and Benefits Division, it was revealed that Espinas had, indeed, applied for optional retirement effective 28 February 2006. However, she has not complied with any of the requirements.
Citing Sec. 63, Rule XVI of the Omnibus Rules on Leave, amended by Resolution No. 99-1885 dated 23 August 1999, the OCA made the following recommendations:
RECOMMENDATION: In view of the foregoing, it is respectfully recommended to the Honorable Court that: (1) Ms. Marietta P. Espinas be DROPPED FROM THE ROLLS effective November 14, 2005 for having been on absence without official leave (AWOL) since said date; (2) her position be declared VACANT; and (3) she be INFORMED of her separation from the service or dropping from the rolls at her address appearing on her 201 files, that is, at San Agustin, Canaman, Camarines Sur.
We sustain the recommendations of the OCA.
It must be emphasized that Espinas has been on AWOL since 14 November 2005, a period of more than twenty-six (26) months. Under Section 63, Rule XVI of the Civil Service Rules, as amended, "an official or employee who is continually absent without an approved leave for as least (30) calendar days shall be considered on absence without official leave (AWOL) and shall be separated from the service or dropped from the rolls without prior notice."
In the case at bar, no application for leave was submitted by Espinas prior to her being absent. According to Judge Bordeos, she presented her applications for leave only on February 2006, weeks after Judge Bordeos reported her being on AWOL for more than thirty (30) days. Indeed, a perusal of one of the vacation leave application forms she submitted would show that the same is undated and unacted upon.[6]
It is well to remind employees applying for vacation leave, that they, whenever possible, must submit in advance their application for leave. This requirement must be complied with assiduously "its purpose being undoubtedly to enable the management to make the necessary adjustment in order that the work may not be paralyzed" or hampered.[7]
Verily, an employee's frequent unauthorized absences not only undermine his efficiency as court personnel, but can also have an adverse effect in the prompt delivery of justice.[8] A court employee's absence without leave for a prolonged and unreasonable period of time constitutes conduct prejudicial to the best interest of public service.[9] It contravenes a public servant's duty to serve the public with utmost responsibility, integrity, loyalty and efficiency. By going on AWOL, Espinas failed to adhere to the highest standards of public accountability imposed on those in government service.[10]
The Court notes that respondent even failed to submit her bundy cards for the month of November up to the present. Thus, on 5 June 2006, in A.M. No. 06-3-212, this Court resolved to withhold the salaries and benefits of Espinas until the bundy cards are submitted.[11] This failure on the Espinas indicates a propensity to neglect her administrative duties.
The conduct and behavior of all court personnel is laden with the heavy burden of responsibility. This Court will not allow any act or omission on the part of those involved in the administration of justice which violates the norm of public accountability and diminishes or tends to diminish the faith of the people in the judiciary.[12]
WHEREFORE, premises considered, the Court hereby RESOLVES, as recommended by the Office of the Court Administrator to:
(1) drop Marietta P. Espinas, Legal Researcher II, regional Trial Court (RTC), Branch 8, Legazpi City, from the rolls;
(2) Declare her position vacant.
The OCA is hereby DIRECTED to INFORM Marietta P. Espinas of her dropping from the rolls at her address appearing in her 201 files, that is, at San Agustin, Canaman, Camarines Sur.
Very truly yours,
(Sgd.) LUDICHI YASAY-NUNAG
Clerk of Court
(Sgd.) LUDICHI YASAY-NUNAG
Clerk of Court
Endnotes:
[1] Rollo, p. 4.
[2] Id. at 5.
[3] As per Judge Bordeos' letter-report dated 17 march 2006. judge Bordeos further made a recommendation that instead of dropping Espinas from the rolls, Espinas be allowed to retire optionally.
[4] Rollo, p. 11.
[5] See id. at 21.
[6] Id. at 18.
[7] Brusola v. Valencia, A.M. No. P-96-1199, 13 October 1997.
[8] Quebral v. Rillorta, A.M. No. P-03-1745, 7 October 2003, citing Dondiego v. Cuevas, A.M. No. P-03-1681, February 28, 2003.
[9] Re: AWOL of Abbas, A.M. No. 6-2-96-RTC, 31 March 2006, citing Re: AWOL of Faraon, A.M. No. 04-12-691-RTC, 18 February 2005, 452 SCRA 12 (2005).
[10] Re: AWOL of Abbas, A.M. No. 6-2-96-RTC, 31 March 2006.
[11] Rollo, p. 25.
[12] Re: AWOL of Abbas, A.M. No. 6-2-96-RTC, 31 March 2006.
