Sample Administrative

Disicplinary Cases
Compiled and Digested by:
ATTY. MARIO R TEOPE JR
Dishonesty

 “Dishonesty has been defined as a form of

conduct which connotes untrustworthiness
and lack of integrity, a disposition to lie,
cheat, deceive, betray.”

Balagso, Teodoro Jr. L., et. al., CSC Resolution No. 99-1085,
May 21, 1999 citing Briones, Rolando A., CSC Resolution
No. 97-3740 dated August 28, 1997
Dishonesty
 “The offenses of Dishonesty and Falsification are
not committed when the element of malice or
willful intention to do a wrong is not very patent
from the acts. Moreover, the evidence presented
must be substantial, that is, relevant evidence that
a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to
sustain a finding of guilt.”

Bandoy, Richard, CSC Resolution No. 99-0139, January 13,

1999 citing Cas, Nimfa, CSC Resolution No. 95-2895 dated
April 18, 1995
Dishonesty

Some acts of dishonesty:

 Submission of fake eligibility

 False declaration in public document such

as the PDS and SALN
 False entry in DTR
Gross Neglect of Duty

 “Negligence is the omission or refusal,

without sufficient causes, to perform an act
or duty, which is the officer’s legal
obligation to perform.”

Morena, Henry P., CSC Resolution No. 00-1086, May 3, 2000

citing Perez, Luzviminda, CSC Resolution No. 97-3237 dated
July 7, 1997
Gross Neglect of Duty

Some acts of gross neglect:

 Proliferation of illegal activities in AOR

 Failure to perform ministerial functions -

such as receipt of applications or conduct of
inspection
 Absence during operations

 Long period of absence which led to non-

fulfillment of specific important office
activities
Grave Misconduct
 “Misconduct in Office has a definite and well-understood legal
meaning. By uniform legal definition it must affect the performance
of his duties as an officer and not such only as affects his character as
a private individual. In such cases, it has been said at all times, it is
necessary to separate the character of the man from the character of
the officer. It is settled that misconduct, misfeasance, or malfeasance
warranting removal from office of an officer must have direct
relation to and be connected with the performance of official duties
amounting either to maladministration or willful, intentional neglect
and failure to discharge the duties of the office.”

Amosco vs. Magro, 72 SCRA 107

Grave Misconduct

Some acts of grave misconduct:

 Sale or use of illegal drugs

 Discharge of firearms

 Sexual harassment or rape

 Illegal exaction

 Violation of RA 6713
Being Notoriously Undesirable
 “The ruling of the Merit Systems Board of the CSC, in a case promulgated on
January 23, 1979, as quoted by the Supreme Court in the case promulgated on
San Luis vs. CA (174 SCRA 258) laid down the test of being notoriously
undesirable, thus:
‘The test of being notoriously undesirable is two-fold: whether it is
common knowledge or generally known as universally believed to be true
or manifest to the world that petitioner committed the acts imputed
against him, and whether he had contracted the habit for any of the
enumerated misdemeanors.
This offense is based mainly on the general reputation of an
employee for being difficult to work with, due to his/her quarrelsome
attitude and/or repeated infractions of office rules. The focus in this
offense is the totality of his conduct in office and not his liability for the
individual acts.’”

Laguilles, Cesar P., CSC Resolution No. 99-0026, January 6, 1999

Being Notoriously Undesirable
 We agree with the hearing committee's finding that Manaois'
notorious undesirability is manifest from his general reputation
among his co-workers in the HRD, as well as his previous transfers
from different divisions of the CTA due to his inability to work well
with others and his disrespect for his immediate supervisors. Escaño,
Mayor, Lising, Miralles, and Adayo, testified that Manaois was
difficult to work with and that he had negative interactions with his
co-employees. Manaois' former supervisor in the Budget Division,
Isidro Barredo, Jr., also stated that Manaois displayed unruly attitude
towards him and had asked that he be transferred to another division.

Escaño v. Manaois, A.M. No. 16-02-01-CTA, November 15, 2016

Engaging Directly or Indirectly in Partisan
Political Activities By One Holding Non-Political
Office
 “No officer or employee in the civil service including
members of the Armed Forces, shall engage directly or
directly or indirectly in any partisan political activity or
take part in any election except to vote nor shall he use his
official authority or influence to coerce the political
activity of any person or body. Nothing herein provided
shall be understood to prevent any officer from expressing
his views on current political problems or issues, or from
mentioning the names of candidates for public office
whom he supports.”

Section 8, Rule XIII, Omnibus Rules on Appointments and Other

Personnel Actions (CSC Memorandum Circular No. 40, s. 1998)
Nepotism
 Section 59. Nepotism - (1) All appointments in the
national, provincial, city and municipal governments or in
any branch or instrumentality thereof, including
government-owned and controlled corporations, made in
favor of a relative (within the third degree) of the
appointing or recommending authority, or of the chief of
the bureau or office, or of the persons exercising
immediate supervision over him, are hereby prohibited.

Section 59(l), Subtitle A, Title I, Book V of the Administrative Code

(Exercutive Order No. 292)
Thank you!