Rimando A. Gannapao v. Civil Service Commission, et al.

, G.R.
No. 180141. May 31, 2011

Conduct Prejudicial to the Best Interest of the Service;

requirements; examples. The acts of respondent constitute the
administrative offense of Conduct Prejudicial to the Best Interest of
the Service, which need not be related to, or connected with, the
public officer’s official functions.  As long as the questioned conduct
tarnishes the image and integrity of his public office, the
corresponding penalty may be meted on the erring public officer or
employee.  Under the Civil Service law and rules, there is no
concrete description of what specific acts constitute the grave
offense of Conduct Prejudicial to the Best Interest of the Service.
However, the Court has considered the following acts or
omissions, inter alia, as Conduct Prejudicial to the Best Interest of
the Service: misappropriation of public funds; abandonment of
office; failure to report back to work without prior notice; failure to
safe keep public records and property; making false entries in
public documents; falsification of court orders; a judge’s act of
brandishing a gun and threatening the complainants during a
traffic altercation; and a court interpreter’s participation in the
execution of a document conveying complainant’s property which
resulted in a quarrel in the latter’s family.Rimando A. Gannapao v.
Civil Service Commission, et al., G.R. No. 180141. May 31, 2011.