JUDGE JOSE A. GALAN, COMPLAINANT, VS. EVELYN NAPASE, CLERK OF COURT AND SALVACION STA. ROSA, STAFF ASSISTANT II, MTC, SIRUMA, CAMARINES SUR, RESPONDENTS.

In a sworn letter-complaint (Rollo, p.
1), Judge Jose A. Galan, MTC, Siruma,
Camarines Sur, charged
Evelyn Napase and Salvacion
Sta. Rosa, Clerk of Court and Staff Assistant II, respectively, of the said
court with gross misconduct and falsification of their Daily Time Records (DTRs).

As required by this Court, respondents filed their comment and/or
answer to the sworn letter-complaint (Rollo, p. 36).

The case was thereafter referred to Executive Judge Jose V. Nepumoceno, RTC, Branch 23, Naga City,
Camarines Sur for investigation, report and recommendation (Rollo, p. 57). 
However, in a subsequent communication (Rollo,
p. 58) dated 25 March 1991, Executive Judge Edgar S. Surtida,
RTC, Naga City,
was designated to conduct the investigation.

In his investigation, report and recommendation dated 15 May 1991 (Rollo,
pp. 80-84), Judge Surtida made the following
findings:

“The complainant recounted that a verification of the
Municipal court’s record (Exhs. -I, I-1, -K to -T and
Exh. -U, including its submarkings) and record of the Leave Section of the Supreme
Court (the originals of Exhs. -KK to -TT,
including its submarkings) made by the former on
account of the numerous absences of the respondents revealed to his surprise
that the respondents had failed to reflect in their daily time records
submitted to the Leave Section (Exhs. -KK to -TT)
their actual absences making it appear therein that they rendered services on
all working days without absences when in truth and in fact, they had numerous
absences as clearly reflected in their daily time records submitted to the
complainant (Exh. -K to -T).

The complainant in other words, maintained that the correct or
genuine daily time records of the respondents were those submitted to him (Exhs. -K to -T and its submarkings) which were based on the log book (Exh. U) and summary report of absences of court
employees, while the falsified or forged daily time records were those
submitted by the respondents to the leave section of the Supreme Court (Exhs. -KK to -TT including its submarkings) which reflect no absences and are not borne
out by the entries in the log book and summary report of absences of personnel.

The complainant recalled that the frequent and numerous absences of
the respondents prompted him to issue several memoranda to the latter (Exhs. -B to -H, including its submarkings, folio for exhibits).  The inquiries made by the complainant
revealed that the respondent Evelyn Napase have (sic)
incurred 540 days of absences from the year 1984 up to 1989, while the respondent
Salvation Sta. Rosa incurred a total of 347 days of absences from the year 1985
up to Sept. 1989 (Exhs. -I and I-1).  The complainant immediately requested for
certified copies of the respondents’ daily time records for the years 1988 and
1989 submitted to the Leave Section of the Supreme Court after his discovery of
the falsification.  Despite his request
for certified copies of the daily time records, the complainant was issued only
simple xeroxed copies of the falsified daily time
records by the Leave Section which he attached to his complaint.

Due to the frequency of the absences of respondent Evelyn Napase the complainant as early as the year 1986 verbally
withdrew from her the authority to sign daily time records of court personnel,
a task which he himself since then undertook. 
The complainant explained that it was some of the entries and his
signatures that were forged or falsified by the respondent Evelyn Napase in Exhs. -KK to -NN
because that were made to appear as his signatures over the typewritten names
Jose A. Galan in the said daily time records were not
really his signatures.  The other falsifications that the complainant referred to in Exhs. -KK to -NN were those entries therein that
were made to appear that Evelyn Napase rendered
service and was present on all working days, when in truth and in fact, she
incurred absences as reflected in Exhs. -K to -N and
its submarkings. 
Judge Galan maintained that his real or
genuine signatures were those appearing over his typewritten names in Exhs. -K to -N.

Judge Galan further contended that some
entries of Exhs. -OO to -TT were likewise falsified
because it was made to appear therein that the respondent Salvacion
Sta. Rosa rendered services and was present on all working days, whereas, in Exhs. -O to -T her absences or leaves were duly
reflected.  Moreover, respondent Evelyn Napase signed or approved the originals of Exhs. -OO to -TT at a time when she was no longer
authorized to sign or approve daily time records of court personnel considering
that her authority was withdrawn by the complainant since the year 1986.

Upon his discovery of the forgeries Judge Galan
confronted the respondents in the presence of the other staff members of the
court.  Respondent Evelyn Napase promised not to repeat the infraction, while
respondent Salvacion Sta. Rosa just remained silent
although her facial expression revealed that she was a little bit shocked at
the confrontation.  Despite the
complainant’s leniency and compassion the respondents failed to reform.  The complainant claimed to have been scolded
by Deputy Court Administrator Juanito Bernad when he consulted the latter regarding the
respondents’ grave misconduct and falsifications and right there and then was directed to file charges against the respondents.  The complainant out of compassion, allowed
three (3) more months to elapse before he finally filed this administrative
case.

On the other hand, the respondents Evelyn Napase
and Salvacion Sta. Rosa denied the charges against
them calling the same as lies, merely designed to harass and eventually force
them (respondents) to resign from the service (Exhs.
-1, 1-A and 1-B, p. 36-40, record).

Evelyn Napase
recalled having been appointed on August
15, 1970 as clerk-stenographer and on July 1, 1979 as clerk of court with a total of twenty (20)
years, continuous service without having been charged administratively except
in the instant case (Exh. -2, p. 41, Record).  Evelyn Napase
identified the service records of her co-respondent Salvacion
Sta. Rosa which showed that she was appointed as staff assistant II on July 15,
1985 and served up to the present, or five (5) years continuous (sic) service (Exh. 3, p. 42, Record).

As of May 31, 1990
respondent Evelyn Napase claimed to be still credited
with 12 days vacation leave and 116 days sick leave (Exhs.
-4, 4-A, 4-B, 4-C and 4-D, p. 39, folio of exhs.). 
Evelyn Napase claimed that she always filed an
application for leave whenever she goes on leave of absence.

Evelyn Napase denied having falsified the
signatures of the complainant on the questioned daily time records; maintaining
that it was impossible considering that she has no special skills to enable her
to forge signatures and that she is left-handed while the complainant is
right-handed.  She likewise denied the existence
of the originals of Exhs. -KK to -TT.  Evelyn Napase
contended that she was the one who signed or approved the daily time records of
court personnel up to the year 1989 when the complainant Judge Galan took it up himself to approve and sign the daily time
records of all court personnel up to the present.  She also recounted that before the year 1989,
she was the one who submitted copies of DTRs to the
leave section of the Supreme Court but after 1989 it was Judge Galan who then asked someone in the staff to mail it.  Respondent, Evelyn Napase
also admitted that the summary report of absences of personnel (Exh. I-1) was based on the logbook (Exh.
U) and the DTRs.

The records show that the respondent Salvacion
Sta. Rosa was originally an employee of the Provincial Government of Cam. Sur before she was appointed to her present position as
Staff Assistant II of the Municipal Trial Court of Siruma,
Cam. Sur.  In the year 1980 she was an awardee as an outstanding employee of the province
of Camarines Sur
by then Provincial Governor Felix Fuentebella (Exhs. -5, 5-A and 5-B, p. 44, Record).  The application for leave of absence by
respondent Salvacion Sta. Rosa approved by the
complainant was identified by respondent Evelyn Napase
(Exhs. -6 to 6-D, folio for exhs.).  Sta. Rosa’s application for leave of absence
was duly granted partially with pay and partially without pay (Exhs. -7, 7-A and 7-B, p. 46), Record).  Sta. Rosa had leave credits amounting to
42,442 days in her favor by way of vacation and sick leave credits from the province
of Camarines Sur
by the time of her assumption of office as court Staff Assistant II.  Despite the fact that Sta. Rosa still had
accrued leave credits, the complainant on Aug. 10, 1990 returned to the
accounting section of the Supreme Court two (2) of her salary checks (Exhs. -9, 9-A and 9-B, p. 48, Record).

The respondent Salvacion Sta. Rosa did
not appear and testify in her behalf on account of her being physically
indisposed according to her defense counsel.

It will be noted from the evidence adduced that the respondent
Evelyn Napase who had been in the service for twenty
(20) years, since the year 1970, can only accumulate a maximum of six hundred
(600) days accrued leave credits.  The
record also shows that from the year 1984 to 1989 respondent Evelyn Napase incurred a total of 540 days absences or 390 days in
excess of the 150 days that she could have earned as leave credits for said
period of time (1984 to 1989 or a period of 5 years).  It is likewise noteworthy that respondent Salvacion Sta. Rosa who had been in the service as court
employee for only 5 years (from July 15, 1985) with 42 days accrued leave
credits at the time of her transfer from the Provincial Government of Cam. Sur,
could have only accumulated a total of 192 days accrued leave credits.  Yet, the record reveals that Salvacion Sta. Rosa from the year 1985 to September 1989 or
a period of only 4 years had incurred a total of 347 days absences or 155 days
in excess of her accrued leave credits of only 192 days.

It is clear therefore from the foregoing that between the
complainant and the respondents, it is the latter who quite obviously have a
strong motive to perpetrate the falsification of the questioned documents (DTRs) and who actually benefited from the said
forgeries.  In falsi­fication or forgery,
the person or persons who are or were in possession of, made use of, or bene­fited
from the forged or falsified documents are legally presumed to be the forgers.

A careful comparison of the specimen signatures
of the complainant Judge A. Galan presented by him in
evidence (Exhs. K-2 to N-2
in -K to -N) on one hand and the questioned signa­tures on the daily time
records of the respondent Napase (Exhs.
-KK-2 to NN-2 in -KK to -NN), on the other hand, would readily convince any
impartial observer that there are significant differences or discrepancies in
the structure, strokes, form, and general appearance of the two (2) sets of
signatures, so that the inevitable conclusion is that the two (2) sets of
signatures were not written or signed by only one and the same person, namely,
Judge Jose A. Galan.”

and concluded
that:

“As the evidence stand, it is clear that the complainant has
established by a preponderance of evidence the charge of grave misconduct and
falsification of daily time records against the herein respondents.”

with the
following recommendations:

“WHEREFORE, it is respectfully recommended that the
respondents Evelyn Napase and Salvacion
Sta. Rosa, Clerk of Court and Staff Asst. II, respectively, of the Municipal
Trial Court of Siruma, Camarines
Sur, be found guilty of grave misconduct and
falsification of daily time records and be accordingly penalized with
suspension for one (1) year with forfeiture of salary and other benefits for
the same period of time.”

The Court, after a thorough and careful examination of the
records of the case, holds that the findings and conclusion of Judge Surtida are supported by the evidence and agrees with his
conclusion that respondents are guilty of grave misconduct and falsification of
daily time records.  However, the Court
does not agree with his recommendation as to the penalty.

Under Memorandum Circular No. 30, series of 1989, issued by the
Civil Service Commission, the respondents’ misconduct falls within the
classification of grave offenses, such as for Dishonesty, Grave Misconduct and
Falsification of Official Document.  The
corresponding penalty prescribed for such offenses is Dismissal from the Service.

ACCORDINGLY, the Court holds respondents Evelyn Napase and Salvacion Sta. Rosa
guilty of gross misconduct and falsification of daily time records and orders
their DISMISSAL from the service with forfeiture of all retirement benefits
except validly accrued leaves, and with prejudice to re-employment in any
government office or agency including government owned or controlled
corporations.

SO ORDERED.

Narvasa, C.J., Melencio-Herrera,
Gutierrez, Jr., Cruz, Paras, Feliciano, Padilla, Bidin, Grino-Aquino, Medialdea, Regalado, Davide, Jr., Romero, and
Nocon, JJ., concur.

Bellosillo, J., no part. Did not participate in the deliberations.