Facts:

The case at hand involves Amer M. Balindong as the petitioner against Linang D. Mandangan, who served as the Provincial Governor of Lanao del Sur, along with Kasan A. Marohombsar, the Vice-Governor, and members of the Provincial Board, Ibrahim Ali and Bajunaid Balt, as respondents. This dispute arose from an order of preventive suspension that was issued against Balindong, who was then the Mayor of Balabagan, Lanao del Sur. This suspension was based on the existence of two complaints lodged against him concerning charges of oppression, misconduct in office, and dishonesty. The case reached the Supreme Court on November 29, 1977, following previous proceedings that began when the Court, on May 30, 1969, required the respondents to answer the petitioner's challenge concerning the validity of the suspension order, resulting in a writ of preliminary injunction against the enforcement of that order. The events leading to the suspension had been long-standing, as out

...

Facts:

Parties and Proceedings

• Petitioner: Amer M. Balindong, formerly serving as the Mayor of Balabagan, Lanao del Sur.
• Respondents:
• Linang D. Mandangan in his capacity as Provincial Governor of Lanao del Sur.
• Kasan A. Marohombsar in his capacity as Vice-Governor.
• Ibrahim Ali and Bajunaid Balt in their capacity as members of the Provincial Board.
• Nature of the Proceedings:
• A certiorari and prohibition proceeding challenging the validity of an order of preventive suspension issued by the respondents.
• The preventive suspension was imposed due to the pending complaints against petitioner for oppression and misconduct in office, and for dishonesty and misconduct in office.

Chronology and Developments

• Initial Rulings and Pleadings:
• The Court, in its resolution of May 30, 1969, directed the respondents to answer along with the issuance of a writ of preliminary injunction against the suspension order.
• The petitioner duly answered, and an additional plea was filed requesting the lifting of the writ of preliminary injunction; however, this plea was not granted by the Court.
• Subsequent Pleadings:
• Further memoranda and pleadings were submitted by both parties over time.
• In the last pleading by the respondents, they admitted that by December 31, 1971, the case would become moot and academic.
• Contextual Developments Affecting the Case:
• Regular elections for provincial and municipal officials were held in 1971.
• The present Constitution was adopted on January 17, 1973.
• Under Presidential Decrees Nos. 925 and 826, significant changes were introduced:
• Alterations in the names of the provincial boards.
• Changes in the membership and structure of the provincial boards, directly impacting the positions previously held by the parties.

Issue:

• Whether the preventive suspension order issued by the respondents was valid given the existence of pending complaints against petitioner for alleged offenses.
• Whether the petition for the lifting of the writ of preliminary injunction should be granted, considering the circumstances surrounding the pending complaints.
• Whether the ongoing proceedings remain justiciable in light of the considerable time lapse and the consequential changes in both the political landscape and territorial administrative structure.
• Whether the transformation of the political and governmental framework (through elections, constitutional adoption, and presidential decrees) renders the case moot and academic.

Ruling:

• (Subscriber-Only)

Ratio:

• (Subscriber-Only)

Doctrine:

• (Subscriber-Only)