A.M. No. P-21-026 (Formerly OCA IPI No. 11-3659-P) - REYNALDO M. NGO, COMPLAINANT, VS. ATTY. RENATO E. FRADES.

Ruling

Accordingly, he did not notice that the amount stated therein was the amount of money that he actually received from respondent. Anatalio likewise clarified that contrary to what the document suggests, Sheriff Mendoza was not present when he received the money from respondent. In light of the foregoing, this investigation finds respondent to have grossly violated the requirements prescribed in Rule 141. Foremost, he should not have taken active part in the enforcement of the special writ of demolition. The responsibility belongs to Sheriff Mendoza who also has the responsibility to prepare an estimate of expenses for demolition, subject to the approval of the court. Respondent's role was limited to requiring the winning plaintiff to make a deposit of the estimated expenses and thereafter disburse it to his Sheriff. For reasons of his own, respondent assumed the responsibilities of Mendoza in wanton derogation of the law. In sum, this investigation finds respondent to have committed the following wrong acts: 1. By stamp-marking, under the seal of his office, the photocopy of the document "Bilihan ng Lupa" dated 27 July 1987 with the words "certified true/Xerox copy", he falsely certified that the original copy of the document was under his official custody or of the Office of the Clerk of Court, RTC-Multiple Sala, Gapan City. 2. Wrongfully assuming the functions of his subordinate Sheriff Ernesto Mendoza by directly implementing the Special Writ of Demolition issued by this court's Branch 36, personally negotiating with the parties in Civil Case No. 3624 with regard to the fixing of the demolition expenses, and spending the money according to his own discretion, all in gross violation of the procedural requirements of Rule 141 of the Rules of Court. 3. Pocketing the amount of P10,000.00 taken from the amount given him by the plaintiffs in the aforesaid case in the sum of P30,000.00 without lawful authority. 4. Making false representations in a document denominated as [" Kasunduan "] dated 11 June 2011 and offering the same as evidence in this administrative case where he is a respondent for the purpose of subverting the truth. [12] In its Memorandum [13] submitted on April 21, 2014, the OCA fully agreed with the findings of the Investigating Judge and recommended that: a) The Instant administrative complaint against Atty. Renato E. Frades, Clerk of Court, Office of the Clerk of Court, RTC, Gapan City, Nueva Ecija, be RE-DOCKETED as a regular administrative matter; and b) Respondent Frades be found GUILTY of Serious Dishonesty, Gross Neglect of Duty and Grave Misconduct penalized under Section 46(A), Rule 10, of the Revised Rules on Administrative Cases in the Civil Service, and be DISMISSED from the service with forfeiture of retirement benefits except accrued leave credits, and perpetual disqualification from holding public office in any branch or instrumentality of the government, including government- owned or controlled corporations. [14] Issu