Cruz v. Arenal
REITERATIONFacts
The Antecedents: A certain Juan de la Cruz filed an undated and unverified letter-complaint against Judge Glicerio Arenal, Municipal Judge of Quezon, Quezon, charging him with Extortion, Grave Misconduct, Habitual Drunkenness, Neglect of Duty, and Oppression. The letter-complaint was referred to the respondent judge for comment. Procedural History: The respondent judge answered the charges, denying all accusations. Subsequently, the Assistant Executive Secretary informed the Secretary of Justice that the President accepted the resignation of Atty. Glicerio Arenal as Municipal Judge, effective immediately. The Secretary of Justice then advised the respondent judge of the acceptance of his resignation. The Petition: The administrative complaint was brought before the Supreme Court.
Issue(s)
Whether the administrative complaint against Judge Glicerio Arenal should be dismissed for being moot and academic following the acceptance of his resignation by the President.
Ruling
The administrative complaint against Ex-Municipal Judge Glicerio Arenal is DISMISSED and considered terminated.
Ratio Decidendi
On Issue 1: The Supreme Court held that the administrative complaint must be dismissed because the respondent's resignation had already been accepted by the President. Citing the correspondence from the Office of the President dated September 28, 1973, the Court noted that the resignation was effective immediately, which was subsequently relayed to the respondent by the Secretary of Justice. The Court applied the doctrine established in previous administrative cases, such as Calagan v. Gabriel (1973) and Viado v. Tumulak (1973), where it ruled that once a resignation is accepted, the administrative case against the judge becomes moot and academic. Furthermore, the Court pointed out that the complaint was unverified, which violated the procedural requirements of Section 1, Rule 140 of the Rules of Court and Section 32, Article VII of Republic Act No. 2260. Because the complainant failed to satisfy the verification requirement and the respondent was no longer in the service, the Court found no further reason to proceed with the investigation. Consequently, the case was considered terminated for lack of practical relief and procedural infirmity.
Main Doctrine
An administrative complaint, not being verified, may be dismissed as moot and academic if the respondent's resignation has been accepted by the President.