ChanRobles Virtual law Library

[A.M. No. 04-6-333-RTC. August 9, 2004]

AWOL OF JESUS A. LIM

Gentlemen:

Quoted hereunder, for your information, is a resolution of this Court dated AUG 9 2004 .

A.M. No. 04-6-333-RTC (Absence Without Leave [AWOL] of Jesus A. Lim, RTC, Branch 21, Cebu City .)

In a Telegram dated August 4, 2003, ^[1] cralaw the Office of Administrative Services of the Office of the Court Administrator (OAS-OCA) requested Hon. Isaias P. Dicdican, then Presiding Judge ^[2] cralaw of the Regional Trial Court (RTC), Branch 21, Cebu City to require Jesus A. Lim (Mr. Lim), Utility Worker I, to submit his Daily Time Records (DTRs) for the months of May, June and July 2003 or explain why he did not submit the same; otherwise, his salary for those months would be withheld.

Thereafter, the OAS-OCA, through Judge Dicdican, sent a letter dated November 11, 2003 to Mr. Lim. The OAS-OCA required him to explain why he went on absence without official leave (AWOL) beginning May 5, 2003. The letter states:

Our records show that you have been continuously absent from Office since 5 May 2003 up to the present without any approved leave of absence, a conduct prejudicial to the best interest of the service and punishable under the Civil Service Law.

You are therefore, required to explain in writing your unauthorized absences, the same to be submitted within five (5) days from receipt hereof, favorably endorsed by your Presiding/Executive Judge, otherwise, this Office will be constrained to recommend that you be dropped from the rolls. ^[3] cralaw

Mr. Lim did not file any explanation for his unauthorized absences. Thus, on April 1, 2004, the OAS-OCA sent another letter to the pairing judge of the RTC, Judge Bienvenido R. Saniel, Jr., informing him that Mr. Lim had not been reporting for work since May 5, 2003 and that notwithstanding its November 11, 2003 letter, Mr. Lim failed to explain his unauthorized absences. The OAS-OCA requested Judge Saniel to recommend whether Mr. Lim should be dropped from the rolls in view of the aforementioned circumstances.

On April 5, 2004, Judge Simeon P. Dumdum, Jr., Acting Executive Judge of the RTC, 7^th Judicial Region, indorsed to the OCA a letter dated April 2, 2004 from Atty. Ma. Teresa F. Jaca, Branch Clerk of Court of the RTC. ^[4] cralaw Atty. Jaca stated therein that Mr. Lim did not report for work for the eighth consecutive month since May 2003. ^[5] cralaw Judge Dumdum recommended that Mr. Lim's case be acted upon promptly. ^[6] cralaw

In a letter dated May 21, 2004, Judge Gabriel T. Ingles, then the newly designated presiding judge of the RTC, also recommended that the matter of Mr. Lim's unauthorized absences be resolved with dispatch because it was causing demoralization among the other court employees. ^[7] cralaw

After reviewing the records of Mr. Lim, the Office of the Court Administrator (OCA), in its Memorandum dated June 8, 2004, recommended that Mr. Lirn be dropped from the rolls and that his position be declared vacant due to his prolonged and unjustified absence without official leave. ^[8] cralaw

The Court sustains the recommendation of the OCA.

From May 5, 2003 up to the present, Mr. Lim has not reported for work. Neither did he file any application for leave of absence. Furthermore, he failed to explain his prolonged and unauthorized absence from work.

Mr. Lim's act of going on AWOL undeniably prejudiced public service, ^[9] cralaw because during the period of his prolonged and unauthorized absence, his fellow employees in the RTC were constrained to perform his tasks in addition to their respective duties. His utter disregard of his duties as a public servant and as an employee in the Judiciary warrants his dropping from the rolls. The Court has repeatedly held that the conduct and behavior an employee working in an office charged with the dispensation of justice, such as the lower courts, from the presiding judge to the lowest clerk, should be circumscribed with the heavy burden of responsibility, ^[10] cralaw for indeed, the image of a court of justice is necessarily mirrored in the conduct of its officials and employees. ^[11] cralaw The Court will not countenance any act or omission which diminishes or tends to diminish the faith of the people in the Judiciary. ^[12] cralaw

Inasmuch as Mr. Lim has been absent without official leave from May 5, 2003 to the present, the Court hereby resolves to drop him from the roll of employees pursuant to Section 63, Rule XVI of the Omnibus Rules on Leave, as amended, which provides:

Effect of absences without approved leave. - An official or an employee who is continuously absent without approved leave for at least thirty 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. He shall, however, be informed, at his address appearing on his 201 files of his separation from the service, not later than five (5) days from its effectivity.

There is also a need for the OCA to verify if Mr. Lim received his salary and other benefits from May 5, 2003 up to the present, as alleged by Judge Ingles ^[13] cralaw and Atty. Jaca ^[14] cralaw in their respective letters to the Court Administrator. If their claims are correct, Mr. Lim should be ordered to immediately return whatever amounts he received corresponding to his salary and other employee benefits since he went on AWOL. If it is not true that Mr. Lim received such salaries and benefits, the same should be withheld from him.

WHEREFORE, respondent Mr. Jesus A. Lim is hereby DROPPED from the roll of employees and his position is declared VACANT. His salaries and other employee benefits from May 5, 2003 to the present are likewise ordered WITHHELD. If such salaries and benefits were erroneously received by him, he is ordered to RETURN the amounts corresponding thereto immediately.

Let a copy of this Resolution be served upon the respondent at his address appearing in his 201 files pursuant to Section 63, Rule XVI of the Omnibus Civil Service Rules and Regulations.

Very truly yours,

(Sgd.) LUDICHI YASAY-NUNAG
Clerk of Court

Endnotes:

^[1] cralaw Rollo, p. 3.

^[2] cralaw Now Associate Justice of the Court of Appeals.

^[3] cralaw Id. at 5.

^[4] cralaw The Indorsement of Judge Dumdum and the April 2, 2004 letter of Atty. Jaca was received by the OCA on May 27, 2004.

^[5] cralaw Rollo, p. 7.

^[6] cralaw Id. at 8.

^[7] cralaw Id. at 9. The letter from Judge Ingles was received by the OCA also on May 27, 2004.

^[8] cralaw Id. at 1-2.

^[9] cralaw Office of the Court Administrator v. Grecia, A.M. No. P-94-1075, July 14, 1995, 246 SCRA 139; Torres v. Tayros, A.M. No. P-94-1033, August 12, 1994, 235 SCRA297.

^[10] cralaw Re: Absence Without Official leave (AWOL) of Ms. Lilian B. Bantog, Court Stenographer III, RTC, Branch 168, Pasig City, A.M. No. 00-11-52 1-RTC, June 20, 2001, 359 SCRA 20, citing Garcia v. Eullaran, A.M. No. P-89-327, April 19, 1991, 196 SCRA 1; Office of the Court Administrator v. Grecia, supra., note 4; see also Gaviola v. Navarette, A.M. No. P-97-1245, July 7, 1997, 275 SCRA 66, Parades v. Borromeo, A.M. No. P-2391, August 6, 1990, 99 SCRA 57.

^[11] cralaw Bicbic v. Borromeo, A.M. Mo. P-01-1506, September 10, 2001, 364 SCRA 762; Lauro v. Lauro, A.M. No. P-91-642, June 6, 2001, 358 SCRA 405.

^[12] cralaw Re: Absence Without Official Leave (AWOL) of Ms. Lilian B. Bantog, Court Stenographer III, RTC, Branch 168, Pasig City, supra., note 5; Office of the Court Administrator v. Grecia, supra., note 4.

^[13] cralaw See letter addressed to Court Administrator Presbitero J. Velasco, Jr. dated May 21, 2004, Rollo, p. 9.

^[14] cralaw See letter addressed to Court Administrator Presbitero J. Velasco, Jr. dated April 2, 2004, Id. at 7.

Back to Home | Back to Main

 

CLICK HERE FOR THE LATEST SUPREME COURT JURISPRUDENCE

1901	1902	1903	1904	1905	1906	1907	1908
1909	1910	1911	1912	1913	1914	1915	1916
1917	1918	1919	1920	1921	1922	1923	1924
1925	1926	1927	1928	1929	1930	1931	1932
1933	1934	1935	1936	1937	1938	1939	1940
1941	1942	1943	1944	1945	1946	1947	1948
1949	1950	1951	1952	1953	1954	1955	1956
1957	1958	1959	1960	1961	1962	1963	1964
1965	1966	1967	1968	1969	1970	1971	1972
1973	1974	1975	1976	1977	1978	1979	1980
1981	1982	1983	1984	1985	1986	1987	1988
1989	1990	1991	1992	1993	1994	1995	1996
1997	1998	1999	2000	2001	2002	2003	2004
2005	2006	2007	2008	2009	2010	2011	2012
2013

PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

QUICK SEARCH

1901	1902	1903	1904	1905	1906	1907	1908
1909	1910	1911	1912	1913	1914	1915	1916
1917	1918	1919	1920	1921	1922	1923	1924
1925	1926	1927	1928	1929	1930	1931	1932
1933	1934	1935	1936	1937	1938	1939	1940
1941	1942	1943	1944	1945	1946	1947	1948
1949	1950	1951	1952	1953	1954	1955	1956
1957	1958	1959	1960	1961	1962	1963	1964
1965	1966	1967	1968	1969	1970	1971	1972
1973	1974	1975	1976	1977	1978	1979	1980
1981	1982	1983	1984	1985	1986	1987	1988
1989	1990	1991	1992	1993	1994	1995	1996
1997	1998	1999	2000	2001	2002	2003	2004
2005	2006	2007	2008	2009	2010	2011