1
REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES
PROVINCE OF NUEVA VIZCAYA
OFFICE OF THE SANGGUNIANG BAYAN
XXXXXXX
Complainants,
ADM. CASE NO.
-versus-
YYYYYYY
Respondent.
X-----------------x
ANSWER
The respondent, unto the Honorable Sangguniang Bayan, by way of Answer to the
Complaint, most respectfully avers:
1. Paragraph 1 of the Complaint is admitted;
2. Paragraph 2 is admitted;
3. Paragraph 3 is specifically denied the truth of the matter being that the
respondent never sold the said bicycles to any person. From the moment that those
bicycles were acquired, they were used by the Barangay Tanods and after their work, they
were being delivered back for security reasons in the house of the respondent. However,
by reason of wear and tear, one was already destroyed. What was sold by the respondent
herein was his personal bicycle, a copy of the Affidavit of the person to whom it was sold
is attached as Annex “A” hereof;
4. Paragraph 4 is specifically denied the truth of the matter being that respondent
never falsified any resolution;
5. Paragraph 5 is denied the truth of the matter being that the 40 pcs GI pipes were
used in Purok Ipil-ipil going towards the Munguia Elementary School;
6. Paragraph 6 is denied for having no sufficient knowledge to form a belief as to
the truth thereof;
7. Paragraph 7 as to the averment that respondent falsified a Resolution forging
the signature of the Barangay Secretary and attaching therein a Detailed Estimate is
2
denied the truth of the matter being that the said allegation is a mere product of
imagination just to harass me;
8. Paragraph 8 is sepecifically denied the truth of the matter being that respondent
never forged such Resolution or forged the signature of the Brgy. Secretary; It is the first
time that he saw the alleged Resolution in the Complaint;
9. Paragraph 9 is denied the same being a mere conclusion of law;
AND BY WAY OF SPECIAL AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES:
10. While the Complaint is denominated as “Dishonesty, Miscounduct in Office,
Abuse of Authority and Violation of RA 6713, 3019 and the Revised Penal Code With
Prayer for Prev. Suspension” , the Honorable Sangguniang Bayan does not have
jurisdiction over Violation of RA 6713, RA 3019 and provisions of the Revised Penal
Code, hence, the case pertaining to the same should be dismissed instantly;
11. The instant case should be dismissed considering that the same is a mere
harassment against the respondent considering that he was doing his best for the interest
of the barangay while the complainants are innately sloth, extremely lazy who like only
to stand still without doing anything except to look for and fabricate falsities to
aggrandize themselves;
12 That the prayer for Preventive Suspension should not be granted considering
that it does not appear that the respondent can have any influence against any of the
witnesses of the complainant or that he could have access to the documents connected in
the alleged offenses filed against him;
WHEREFORE PREMISES CONSIDERED, it is respectfully prayed that the
instant case be dismissed.
