Title
Board of Transportation vs. Castro
Case
G.R. No. L-53431
Decision Date
Oct 27, 1983
BOT's office transfer to Pasig, approved by the President, was lawful; private respondent's premature suit and judge's inaction deemed grave abuse of discretion.
Font Size:

Case Digest (G.R. No. L-53431)

Facts:

Background of the Case

The Board of Transportation (BOT) sought to transfer its offices from the Gutierrez-David Building in Quezon City to the Sandoval Building in Pasig, Metro Manila. The Ministry of Transportation and Communications recommended this move to address issues such as accessibility to fixers, shared facilities, and security concerns.

Initial Actions

On January 28, 1980, the Greater Manila Federation of Jeepney Operators and Drivers Association, Inc. (private respondent) filed a petition to prevent the transfer, arguing it was illegal, abusive, and detrimental to their interests. The same day, Judge Ernani Cruz Pano issued a temporary restraining order (TRO) halting the transfer.

Petitioner’s Arguments

BOT filed a motion to dismiss, stating that the transfer was necessary to curb fixers, ensure record security, and improve coordination with the Ministry of Transportation. They also emphasized that the President approved the transfer on February 19, 1980.

Respondent’s Claims

Private respondent argued that the transfer violated the Public Service Act, was financially disadvantageous, and caused unnecessary difficulties for their members. They also claimed the lease agreement for the Sandoval Building did not comply with LOI No. 767.

Lower Court’s Inaction

Judge Jose P. Castro failed to resolve BOT’s motion to lift the TRO and private respondent’s motion for a preliminary injunction, prompting BOT to file this petition before the Supreme Court.

Issue:

  1. Did respondent Judge Jose Castro commit grave abuse of discretion by failing to resolve the motions promptly?
  2. Was the transfer of BOT’s offices to Pasig lawful?
  3. Did private respondent exhaust administrative remedies before seeking judicial intervention?

Ruling:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Ratio:

  • (Subscriber-Only)


Jur is an AI-powered legal research platform in the Philippines for case digests, summaries, and jurisprudence. AI-generated content may contain inaccuracies; please verify independently.