TodayisTuesday,January17,2017

RepublicofthePhilippines
SUPREMECOURT
Manila

FIRSTDIVISION

A.M.No.202July22,1975

RENEP.RAMOS,complainant,
vs.
MOISESR.RADA,respondent.

CASTRO,J.:

Moises R. Rada a messenger in the Court of First Instance of Camarines Norte, Branch II, is charged with a
violationofSection12ofCivilServiceRuleXVIII,whichprovidesasfollows:

Sec.12.Noofficeroremployeeshallengagedirectlyinanyprivatebusiness,vocation,orprofessionor
be connected with any commercial, credit, agricultural or industrial undertaking without a written
permissionfromtheheadofDepartment:Provided,Thatthisprohibitionwillbeabsoluteinthecaseof
thoseofficersandemployeeswhosedutiesandresponsibilitiesrequirethattheirentiretimebeatthe
disposaloftheGovernment:....

FromtherespondentRada'slettersofexplanationandtheirannexes,datedDecember16,1973andJune27,1974,
respectively, and the letter and its annexes, dated August 12, 1974, filed by the complainant Rene P. Ramos, by
wayofrejoindertoRada'sexplanation,undisputedfundamentalfactsemergethatjustifyusindispensingwithafull
blowninvestigationofthisadministrativecase.

The respondent Rada receives a monthly salary of P267.75. On December 15, 1972 he was extended an
appointmentbytheAvescoMarketingCorporation,thruitspresident,JimmyTang,asrepresentativetomanageand
superviserealpropertiessituatedinCamarinesNortewhichwereforeclosedbythecorporation.Radaacceptedthe
appointmentanddischargedhisdutiesasadministrator.TheadministrativecomplaintagainstRadawasfiledwith
theDepartmentofJusticeonOctober3,1973.HerequestedpermissiontoaccepttheappointmentonOctober27,
1973. It is not indicatedthathisacceptanceanddischargeofthedutiesoftheposition of administrator has at all
impairedhisefficiencyasmessengernorhasitbeenshownthathedidnotobserveregularofficehours.

Indubitably, therefore, Rada has violated the civil service rule prohibiting government employees from engaging
directlyinaprivatebusiness,vocationorprofessionorbeingconnectedwithanycommercial,credit,agriculturalor
industrial undertaking without a written permission from the head of the Department. But, indubitably, also, his
privatebusinessconnectionhasnotresultedinanyprejudicetotheGovernmentservice.Thus,hisviolationofthe
rule the lack of prior permission is a technical one, and he should be meted no more than the minimum
imposablepenalty,whichisreprimand.

ThedutiesofmessengerRadaaregenerallyministerialwhichdonotrequirethathisentiredayof24hoursbeatthe
disposal of the Government. Such being his situation, it would be to stifle his willingness to apply himself to a
productiveendeavortoaugmenthisincome,andtoawardapremiumforslothfulnessifheweretobebannedfrom
engaginginorbeingconnectedwithaprivateundertakingoutsideofofficehoursandwithoutforeseeabledetriment
totheGovernmentservice.HisconnectionwithAvescoMarketingCorporationneednotbeterminated,buthemust
secure a written permission from the Executive Judge of the Court of First Instance of Camarines Norte, who is
herebyauthorizedtograntorrevokesuchpermission,undersuchtermsandconditionsaswillsafeguardthebest
interestsoftheservice,ingeneral,andthecourt,inparticular.

ACCORDINGLY, the respondent Moises R. Rada is adjudged guilty of a technical violation of Section 12 of Civil
ServiceRuleXVIII,forwhichheisherebyreprimanded.Hemayhoweverapply,ifhesodesires,forpermissionto
resumehisbusinessconnectionwiththecorporation,inthemanneraboveindicated.

Makasiar,Esguerra,MuozPalmaandMartin,JJ.,concur.
Teehankee,J.,isonleave.

TheLawphilProjectArellanoLawFoundation