This case has been cited 6 times or more.
|
2009-07-07 |
|||||
| Estonilo's act of punching in another employee's daily time card falls within the ambit of falsification. Worse, he did not do it for only one co-employee, but for two others. He made it appear as though his co-employees personally punched in their daily time cards. Estonilo also made Padilla's daily time card reflect a log-in time different from the latter's actual time of arrival, as well as made Bambilla's daily time card falsely show that the latter was at the Supreme Court premises in Baguio City when he was not there at all. It is patent dishonesty, which inevitably reflects on Estonilo's fitness as an employee to continue in office and on the level of discipline and morale in the service.[11] | |||||
|
2008-11-27 |
CHICO-NAZARIO, J. |
||||
| Respondent's act of punching in another employee's daily time card falls within the ambit of falsification. Worse, he did not do it for only one co-employee, but for at least five others. He made it appear as though his co-employees personally punched in their respective daily time cards and, at the same time, made the card reflect a log-in time different from their actual times of arrival. It is patent dishonesty, reflective of respondent's fitness as an employee to continue in office and of the level of discipline and morale in the service.[24] Falsification of daily time records is an act of dishonesty. For this, respondent must be held administratively liable. Rule XVII, Section 4 of the Omnibus Civil Service Rules and Regulations (Civil Service Rules) provides:Section 4. Falsification or irregularities in the keeping of time records will render the guilty officer or employee administratively liable x x x. | |||||
|
2006-07-06 |
PER CURIAM |
||||
| An act of dishonesty is punishable by dismissal for the first offense.[11] Such extreme punishment may be imposed in this case, because dishonesty reflects on the fitness of the officer or employee to continue in office and on the discipline and morale of the service.[12] Dishonesty is a serious offense which reflects on the person's character and exposes the moral decay which virtually destroys his honor, virtue, and integrity.[13] | |||||
|
2006-04-25 |
PER CURIAM |
||||
| The strictest standards have always been valued in judicial service. Verily, everyone involved in the dispensation of justice, from the presiding judge to the lowliest clerk, is expected to live up to the strictest norm of competence, honesty and integrity in the public service.[9] This principle echoes what the Constitution enshrines: that a public office is a public trust, and all public officers and employees must at all times be accountable to the people; serve them with utmost responsibility, integrity, loyalty and efficiency; act with patriotism and justice; and lead modest lives.[10] Further, the Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards for Public Officials and Employees provides that every public servant shall uphold public interest over and above personal interest at all times.[11] | |||||
|
2006-01-31 |
PER CURIAM |
||||
| Respondent's act of punching in his time card with the Bundy clock and punching out almost at the same time is patent dishonesty, reflective of his fitness as an employee to continue in office and the discipline and morale of the service. [17] | |||||
|
2005-09-30 |
AUSTRIA-MARTINEZ, J. |
||||
| Petitioner is charged with dishonesty thru falsification of his PDS. Dishonesty is defined as "intentionally making a false statement in any material fact, or practicing or attempting to practice any deception or fraud in securing his examination, registration, appointment or promotion."[30] It is also understood to imply a "disposition to lie, cheat, deceive, or defraud; untrustworthiness; lack of integrity; lack of honesty, probity or integrity in principle; lack of fairness and straightforwardness; disposition to defraud, deceive or betray"[31] | |||||