ATTY. NELSON T. ANTOLIN AND ATTY. DIOSDADO E. TRILLANA, COMPLAINANTS, VS. JUDGE ALEX L. QUIROZ, SHERIFF EDWIN V. GARROBO, AND SHERIFF MARIO PANGILINAN.

Ruling

Accordingly, they must comply with their mandate obligation as speedily as possible. (Underscoring supplied) Anent OCA IPI No. 04-1993-RTJ , this Office finds the charges and countercharges imputed by the parties unmeritorious. Sheriff Garrobo, aside from his bare allegations that he was berated by Judge Quiroz in the presence of his officemates, presented no evidence to support his assertions . On the other hand, the following personnel of RTC Branch 156, Pasig City, namely: Atty. Albert N. Lavandero, Branch Clerk of Court; Sylvia A. Lozada, Court Stenographer III; Ma. Lorina P. Uson, Interpreter III; Asuncion U. Cipriano, Court Stenographer III; Gina A. Talaro, Court Stenographer III; Floriza A. Guillermo, Court Stenographer III; Bryan Eduard Y. Flores, Clerk III; Arcelito C. Roman, Clerk III; Ronaldo R. Santos, Process Server; and Eileen C. Moraleta, Utility Worker I, when directed by Court Administrator to comment on the incident, unanimously belied the allegations of Sheriff Garrobo. Clearly, OCA IPI No. 04-1993-RTJ has no leg to stand on. With regard to the counter-charges imputed by Judge Quiroz against Sheriff Garrobo for alleged "corrupt practice", we likewise sustain the findings of the Investigating Judge. In administrative proceedings, the complainant has burden of the (sic) proving the allegations in the complaint with substantial evidence which a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to justify a conclusion. Judge Quiroz failed to substantiate his allegations that Sheriff Garrobo acted with dishonesty, corruption or grave misconduct . The Investigating Judge dismissed the witness presented by Judge Quiroz as a "bias and prejudiced witness." The Investigating Judge noted the admission made by the witness that he was designated by Judge Quiroz to keep a close watch on Sheriff Garrobo vis-à-vis the implementation of the subject writ. The claim of the witness that he received money from Sheriff Garrobo was not fully established by convincing evidence. FOREGOING considered, we respectfully submit to the Honorable Court the following recommendations: (1) The Complaint docketed as A.M. OCA IPI No. 03-1893-RTJ against respondent Edwin V. Garrobo, Sheriff IV, Regional Trial Court, Branch 156, Pasig City, be DISMISSED for lack of sufficient merit (2) The charges docketed as A.M. OCA IPI No. 04-1993-RTJ against Judge Alex L. Quiroz be DISMISSED for lack of merit; (3) The counter-charges docketed as A.M. OCA IPI No. 04-1993-RTJ against Sheriff Garrabo (sic) be DISMISSED for want of evidence. (Underscoring supplied) The Court finds the evaluation and recommendations of the Investigating Judge and the OCA well-taken. Respecting A.M. OCA IPI No. 03-1893-RTJ , that sheriffs have an important role to play in the administration of justice cannot be overemphasized. They form an integral part, as they are called upon to serve writs, execute all the processes, and carry into effect the orders, of the court. When placed in their hands, it is their dut