Title
Bulalat vs. Adil
Case
A.M. No. SCC-05-10-P
Decision Date
Oct 19, 2007
Clerk of Court Kyd Abdulwahid I. Adil found guilty of dishonesty and grave misconduct for unauthorized fee collections, failure to issue receipts, and pawning court property; dismissed with forfeiture of benefits and perpetual disqualification from government service.
Font Size:

Case Digest (A.M. No. SCC-05-10-P)

Facts:

  1. Complaint Filed: Andy M. Bulalat filed an affidavit-complaint against Kyd Abdulwahid I. Adil, Clerk of Court of the Shari'a Circuit Court in Kabacan, North Cotobato, alleging falsification and dishonesty.
  2. Allegations:
    • Respondent was accused of collecting fees exceeding the prescribed amount of P50 for delayed marriage registrations, charging P400 to P500 instead.
    • Complainant submitted copies of official receipts (OR Nos. 3793213 and 3793392) issued to Genay D. Mokomad and Dayang K. Malugayak as evidence.
    • Respondent allegedly failed to issue official receipts for payments related to divorce, conversion, or marriage registrations.
    • Respondent was also accused of pawning the court's typewriters to a pawnshop.
  3. Respondent's Defense:
    • Respondent denied the allegations, presenting triplicate copies of the same receipts showing only P50 was collected.
    • He claimed the receipts were issued to different individuals (Sittie I. Baliquat and Sapia O. Duma) and denied pawning the typewriters.
  4. Investigation Findings:
    • During the investigation, respondent admitted to collecting unauthorized fees (P400 to P500) but claimed it was an "honest mistake" due to his heavy workload.
    • He also admitted to failing to issue official receipts at times, citing a lack of available receipts.
    • The investigating judge found respondent liable for dishonesty and recommended dismissal.
    • The Office of the Court Administrator (OCA) concurred, adding that respondent was guilty of grave misconduct.

Issue:

  • (Unlock)

Ruling:

  • (Unlock)

Ratio:

  1. Dishonesty and Grave Misconduct:

    • Respondent's actions, including unauthorized fee collections, issuing single receipts for multiple transactions, and failing to issue official receipts, constituted dishonesty and grave misconduct.
    • Grave misconduct involves intentional wrongdoing, corruption, or a flagrant disregard of established rules. Dishonesty involves a disposition to lie, cheat, or defraud.
    • Respondent's admissions during the investigation confirmed his liability.
  2. Resignation Does Not Moot the Case:

    • Resignation is not a valid means to evade administrative liability. The case proceeded despite respondent's resignation.
  3. Penalties:

    • Under the Uniform Rules on Administrative Cases in the Civil Service, grave misconduct and dishonesty both warrant dismissal for the first offense.
    • Given the severity and repeated nature of respondent's offenses, the Court deemed it necessary to impose additional penalties, including forfeiture of benefits and perpetual disqualification from government service.
  4. Importance of Integrity in Judicial Offices:

    • Clerks of court hold a vital role in the administration of justice and must uphold the highest standards of integrity, honesty, and moral uprightness.
    • Respondent's actions tarnished the judiciary's reputation and undermined public trust in the courts.


Jur is an AI-powered legal research platform in the Philippines for case digests, summaries, and jurisprudence. AI-generated content may contain inaccuracies; please verify independently.