Facts:

The case involves Maria Algabre Chico, who served as Clerk of Court II at the Municipal Circuit Trial Court (MCTC) of Apalit-San Simon, Pampanga. The administrative case arose from a memorandum submitted to Deputy Court Administrator Jose P. Perez on November 29, 2007, by Irene R. Malonzo, the team leader of the Office of the Court Administrator (OCA) Financial Audit Team, which charged Chico with gross dishonesty. The events leading to this case began with a judicial audit conducted from December 9 to 13, 2002, by a Judicial Audit Team that discovered irregularities in the handling of jueteng moneys seized under Presidential Decree No. 1602. These funds were improperly deposited in a cooperative instead of an authorized bank, violating established guidelines.

A financial audit was subsequently conducted from June 23 to 27, 2003, revealing that Chico had in her possession P132,400.00 in undeposited collections from the Fiduciary Fund. The audit team noted that the nearest b...

Facts:

1. Background of the Case

   • The case arose from a financial audit conducted in the Municipal Circuit Trial Court (MCTC) of Apalit-San Simon, Pampanga.
   • Maria Algabre Chico, Clerk of Court II, was charged with gross dishonesty for mishandling court funds.

2. Initial Audit Findings

   • A Judicial Audit Team discovered that jueteng moneys seized for violation of Presidential Decree No. 1602 were deposited in a cooperative under Savings Account No. 6562, with Court Stenographer Ana Marie M. Male as the authorized signatory.
   • The team recommended a thorough financial audit of the books of accounts of respondent Maria Algabre Chico.

3. First Financial Audit (June 2003)

   • A financial audit team found P132,400.00 in undeposited Fiduciary Fund collections in respondent's possession.
   • The team recommended opening a savings account with the Land Bank of the Philippines, but this was not done, violating Circular No. 50-95.

4. Subsequent Findings and Non-Compliance

   • Judge Teodora R. Gonzales reported discrepancies in the court's accounts, including undeposited cash bonds and failure to comply with court orders.
   • Respondent admitted to using the collections for personal expenses and failed to deposit cash bonds totaling P24,000.00.

5. Second Financial Audit (July-August 2007)

   • A second audit team found a shortage of P10,960.40 and other irregularities, including delayed remittances, unreceipted collections, and tampered receipts.
   • Respondent admitted to forging signatures, tampering with receipts, and failing to deposit collections.

6. Respondent's Admissions

   • Respondent admitted to using court funds for personal expenses, forging documents, and failing to comply with financial regulations.
   • She cited financial difficulties due to her family's medical expenses as the reason for her actions.

7. Restitution of Funds

   • Respondent restituted the shortages, including P89,000.00 for the Fiduciary Fund and other amounts for various funds.

Issue:

• (Unlock)

Ruling:

• (Unlock)

Ratio:

1. Violation of Financial Regulations

   • Respondent's failure to deposit collections immediately and her misuse of funds violated Supreme Court Circulars Nos. 13-92 and 5-93.
   • Delayed remittance of cash collections constitutes gross neglect of duty, and failure to remit funds upon demand is prima facie evidence of malversation.

2. Admissions and Restitution

   • Respondent's admissions of guilt and restitution of shortages do not absolve her of administrative liability.
   • Restitution does not erase the fact that she committed gross dishonesty and undermined public trust in the judiciary.

3. Dishonesty and Grave Misconduct

   • Respondent's actions, including forging signatures and tampering with receipts, constitute gross dishonesty and grave misconduct.
   • These offenses are punishable by dismissal under the Uniform Rules on Administrative Cases in the Civil Service.

4. Accountability of Supervising Judge

   • Judge Gonzales was held accountable for failing to address respondent's irregularities promptly.
   • Supervising judges must ensure compliance with financial regulations and take immediate action upon discovering irregularities.