Case Digest (G.R. No. L-33400)
Facts:
The case involves Teodulo E. Abbu as the petitioner against several respondents, including Hon. Bernardo Teves, the Judge of the Court of First Instance of Camiguin, Julio A. Vivares, the Municipal Mayor of Mambajao, and several councilors of the same municipality, namely Marciano Ll. Aparte, Jr., Torcuato J. Reyes, Gil G. Fabe, and Ignacio Penalosa, as well as the Municipal Council of Mambajao represented by Vivares, and Apolonia B. Cimacio. The petition for certiorari was filed on April 12, 1971, challenging an order issued by the respondent Judge on September 23, 1970. The petitioner sought to compel the respondents to recognize him as a duly elected councilor of Mambajao, which would allow him to attend council sessions and fulfill his official duties. The lower court dismissed the suit for mandamus, reasoning that it was effectively a quo warranto action that should have been filed within one year of the ouster. The basis for the dismissal was the resolution of expulsion...
Case Digest (G.R. No. L-33400)
Facts:
- Petitioner's Position: Teodulo E. Abbu was a duly elected councilor of Mambajao, Camiguin.
- Expulsion Resolution: The Municipal Council of Mambajao passed a resolution expelling Abbu from his position, which was later approved by the Provincial Board of Camiguin.
- Replacement: Following the expulsion, Apolonia Cimacio was appointed by the Provincial Governor of Camiguin to replace Abbu as councilor.
- Office of the President's Ruling: The Office of the President declared the expulsion of Abbu illegal and void ab initio.
- Legal Action: Abbu filed a petition for mandamus to compel the respondents to recognize him as a councilor and allow him to attend council sessions.
- Dismissal by Respondent Judge: The respondent judge dismissed the petition, ruling that it was effectively a quo warranto case, which should have been filed within one year from the ouster.
- Expiration of Term: By December 31, 1971, Abbu's term as councilor had expired, rendering the case moot and academic.
Issue:
- Whether the petition for mandamus was the proper remedy for Abbu to regain his position as councilor.
- Whether the case had become moot and academic due to the expiration of Abbu's term as councilor.
Ruling:
The Supreme Court dismissed the petition for being moot and academic. The Court held that since Abbu's term as councilor had already expired, there was no longer any practical relief that could be granted. The Court cited the doctrine established in Gonzaga v. Bico and subsequent cases, which state that cases involving the legality of an official's election or tenure become moot once the term of office has expired.
Ratio:
- (Unlock)