Case Digest (G.R. No. 81374)
Facts:
Jose R. Bautista, Severino Gabuyo and Northeastern College, Inc. v. Hon. Secretary of Labor and Employment, et al., G.R. No. 81374, April 30, 1991, First Division, Cruz, J., writing for the Court. Petitioners are Northeastern College, Inc. and two of its officers, Jose R. Bautista (President) and Severino Gabuyo (Cashier). Respondents include the Secretary of Labor and Employment, the Regional Director, Regional Office No. 2, Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE), Deputy Provincial Sheriff David R. Medina, and the private respondents — former or then-employees Rodeo Bautista, Domingo Cabauatan, Lino Malenab, Hernando Natividad, and Alfredo Jimenez.On December 15, 1984 the private respondents filed a complaint against Northeastern College and its officers for unlawful deductions from wages in violation of Articles 113 and 116 of the Labor Code. Assistant Regional Director Pedro P. Pelaez investigated and found the deductions illegal but initially disallowed reimbursement on the ground the amounts had been applied to legitimate obligations; he dismissed the case in an Order dated January 14, 1985.
The private respondents appealed by letter dated January 25, 1985. Deputy Minister Vicente Leogardo, Jr. affirmed the illegality of the deductions and, in an Order dated January 6, 1986, directed the petitioners to reimburse the amounts withheld. A Writ of Execution was issued by Regional Office No. 2 on September 30, 1987 but was returned unsatisfied for failure to ascertain exact amounts. An Alias Writ of Execution issued December 7, 1987 fixed specific amounts payable to each private respondent.
On December 22, 1987 the petitioners filed an Exception to the Alias Writ, arguing nullity because the underlying appeal was filed out of time and without notice. Regional Office No. 2 dismissed that Exception on December 29, 1987 and ordered enforcement; the deputy sheriff seized office equipment to satisfy the judgment. The petitioners then filed a petition for certiorari and prohibition with preliminary in...(Pro-only)
Issues:
- Were the petitioners denied due process because they were not served with summons or given a formal hearing in the DOLE proceedings?
- Were the DOLE orders and the subsequently issued Writs of Execution (including the Alias Writ) void or annulable for procedural defect, specifically because the appeal was allegedly filed out of time and withou...(Pro-only)
Ruling:
- (Pro-only)
Ratio:
- (Pro-only)
Doctrine:
- (Pro-only)