MORTA V. BAGAGNAN (REMEDIAL)

Unreasonable delay in resolving motions opens a judge to administrative sanctions. Likewise, a sheriff is administratively liable for delayed implementation of a writ of execution and failure to render the required reports thereon. These are necessary lessons from the time-honored principle that "justice delayed is justice denied."

Time and again, we have impressed upon those tasked to implement court orders and processes to see to it that the final stage in the litigation process - the execution of judgment - be carried out promptly. they should exert every effort and indeed consider it ther bounden duty to do so, in order to ensure the speedy and efficient administration of justice. A decision that is left unexecuted or delayed indefinitely because of the sheriff's inefficiency or negligence remains an empty victory on the part of the prevailing party. FOr this reason, any inordinate delay in the execution of judgment is truly deplorable and cannot be countenanced by the court.

There is no mistaking the mandatory character of the period described under Section 14 of Rule 39 of the Revised Rules of Court on the return of a writ of execution, which reads:

SECTION 14. RETURN OF WRIT OF EXECUTION - The writ of execution shall be returnable to the court issuing it immediately after the judgment has been satisfied in part or in full. If the judgment cannot be satisfied in full within 30 days immediately after his receipt of the writ, the officer shall report to the court ans state the reason therefor. Such writ shall continue in effect during the period within which the judgment may be enforced by motion. The officer shall make a report to the court every 30 days on the proceedings taken thereon until the judgment is satisfied in full, or its effectivity expires. The returns or periodic reports shall set forth the whole of the proceedings taken, and shall be filed with the court and copies thereof promptly furnished the parties.

The excuse proffered by respondent sheriff - heavy workload - cannot absolve him from administrative sanctions. As an officer of the court, he should at all times show a high degree of professionalism in the performance of his duties. He has failed to observe that degree of dedication required of him as a sheriff.

Sheriff is found guilty of simple neglect of duty. This infraction is punishable by suspension of 1 month and 1 day to 6 months. But under the circumstances, we find it inadvisable to suspend respondent sheriff, considering that his work would be left unattended in his absence. Instead, we adopt our previous ruling in Aquino v. Lavadia, imposing a fine equivalent to his 1 month salary, so that he can finally implement the subject writ and perform his other duties.