COLLECTION OF FEE FOR TRANSPORT ALLOWANCE WITHOUT PROPER RECEIPT (ETHICS)

The procedural requirement for travel allowance is provided in Section 10 of Rule 141. In this case, not only did Ms. Pilapil grossly ignore the procedural requirement in the collection and disbursement of travel allowance, she also failed to issue an official receipt for the amount she collected. This violated the Supreme Court circular for proper accounting and control of revenues.

We agree with the findings of the OCa that the explanation of Ms. Pilapil for her failure to issue an official receipt for the transportation allowance she collected and received from Atty. Lawas is inadequate and does not justify her disregard of the above requirements.

Ms. Pilapil, as Clerk of Court and as custodian of the court's funds and revenues among others, performs a very delicate function. She assumes a high degree of responsibility relative to these funds, and is accountable not only to the courts but to the litigants and their counsels as well. Her act of collecting some amount for transportation allowance in violation of Section 10 of Rule 141 of the Rules of Court and her failure to issue an official receipt in violation of the said SC circular are matters which this Court cannot tolerate.

Her assertion of good faith cannot override the mandatory nature of the above requirements essentially designed to promote full accountability for governmental funds.

the acts complained of against Ms. Pilapil having a direct relation to, and being connected with the performance of her official duties, constitute MISCONDUCT. Misconduct is defined as a transgression of some established and definite rule of action. For her violation of said provisions, Ms. Pilapil should be held liable for simple misconduct.