A.M. No. P-17-3705 - OFFICE OF THE COURT ADMINISTRATOR, COMPLAINANT, VS. PAULINO I. SAGUYOD, BRANCH CLERK OF COURT, REGIONAL TRIAL COURT, BRANCH 67, PANIQUI, TARLAC.R E S O L U T I O N - Supreme Court E-Library

Ruling

accordingly, be meted the penalty of suspension from the service for a period of one (1) year, with a warning that a repetition of the same or similar offense shall warrant dismissal from service. [15] The OCA found that BCC Saguyod readily admitted to notarizing various documents filed before the RTC without complying with Section (f) of the Resolution dated August 15, 2006 in A.M. No. 02-8-13-SC, and even when some of these documents were not completely accomplished by the concerned parties. [16] In this regard, the OCA found that BCC Saguyod's defenses that he did not charge notarization fees and that there are no available notaries public in Paniqui, Tarlac do not deserve credence, because: (a) his act of notarizing without compliance with the Court's aforesaid resolution directly makes him liable thereunder; and (b) there are other petitions filed before the RTC which are notarized by notaries public based in Paniqui, Tarlac. [17] Finally, in recommending the proper penalty, the OCA pointed out that a mere fine would not suffice, considering the number of times BCC Saguyod repeatedly violated A.M. No. 02-8-13-SC, and the fact that he even went out of his way to notarize documents that were incomplete or sorely lacking in material details. Thus, the OCA recommended that a suspension from service for one (1) year be meted on him, ursuant to the Revised Rules on Administrative Cases in the Civil Service. [18] The Issue Before the Court The essential issue in this case is whether or not BCC Saguyod should be held administratively liable for notarizing various documents submitted to the RTC in connection with the cases filed before it. The Court's Ruling The Court adopts the findings and the recommendation of the OCA that BCC Saguyod must be held administratively liable for inefficiency and incompetence in the performance of official duties. Inefficiency involves specific acts or omission on the part of the employee which results in the damage to the employer or to the latter's business. [19] It is akin to neglect of duty, [20] which is the failure of an employee or official to give proper attention to a task expected of him or her, signifying a disregard of a duty resulting from carelessness or indifference. [21] In this case, BCC Saguyod readily admitted to notarizing hundreds, if not thousands, of various documents which were submitted before the RTC where he is stationed. As a Clerk of Court, BCC Saguyod's acts of notarization should comply with Section (f) of the Resolution dated August 15, 2006 in A.M. No. 02-8-13-SC, which reads: A.M. No. 02-8-13-SC (Re: 2004 Rules on Notarial Practice). The Court resolved to: x x x x (f) AUTHORIZE the Clerks of Court of the Regional Trial Courts to notarize not only documents relating to the exercise of their official functions but also private documents, subject to the following conditions: (i) all notarial fees charged in accordance with Section 7(o) of the Rule 141 of the Rules of Court, and, with resp