Case Digest (G.R. No. L-20740)
Facts:
Bolinao Electronics Corporation, Chronicle Broadcasting Network, Inc., and Monserrat Broadcasting System, Inc., petitioners, filed an original petition for prohibition and mandatory injunction with a prayer for preliminary injunction in G.R. No. L-20740; the case was decided on June 30, 1964, by the Supreme Court En Banc, Barrera, J., writing for the Court. The respondents were Brigido Valencia, Secretary of the Department of Public Works & Communications, and Roberto San Andres, Acting Chief of the Radio Control Division; the Republic of the Philippines, as operator of the Philippine Broadcasting Service (PBS), intervened after being granted a construction permit to install and operate a television station in Manila.The petition challenged an investigation and administrative hearings initiated by respondents in connection with petitioners’ applications for renewal of station licenses. Respondents had sent uniform notices of hearing citing late filing of renewal applications in alleged violation of Department Order No. 11, Sections 12 and 14, and invoking the Secretary’s power under Section 3 of Act No. 3846 (as amended) to approve or disapprove license renewals only after hearing. The notices warned that failure to appear would be treated as waiver.
Petitioners contended the asserted ground for disapproval — late filing — had been condoned by respondents’ own circular of July 24, 1962, which requested operators to regularize records by August 10, 1962; petitioners’ renewal applications had been made before that date. They thus argued the investigation had no legal basis and sought prohibition and injunction against its continuation. Petitioners further denied any abandonment or renunciation by Chronicle Broadcasting Network (CBN) of Channel 9, despite references in various documents to assignment of Channel 10 in connection with a proposed transfer that was never consummated. The intervenor PBS claimed it had a right to operate on Channel 9 and sought damages for CBN’s refusal to yield the channel.
The trial of the administrative question proceeded in the Department through the notices of hearing; respondents maintained the hearing was the statutorily required step preliminary to possible disapproval. The Court examined the legal authority cited by the parties (including Section 3 of Act No. 3846 as amended, and Department Order No. 11), the July 24, 1962 circular, construction ...(Pro-only)
Issues:
- Does the investigation and hearings conducted by respondents in connection with petitioners’ renewal applications have any legal basis?
- Did Chronicle Broadcasting Network (CBN) abandon or renounce its right to operate on Channel 9 in favor of PBS?
- Can PBS legally operate Channel 9 and is it entitled to damages for CBN’s refusal to g...(Pro-only)
Ruling:
- (Pro-only)
Ratio:
- (Pro-only)
Doctrine:
- (Pro-only)