G.R. No. 83536 - Go vs. Tabanda

Wilbur Go was the official administration candidate for Mayor of Currimao, Ilocos Norte.
Cirilo Quilala, a private respondent and KBL candidate, contested the mayoralty in the January 18, 1988 elections.

The Municipal Board of Canvassers of Currimao, Ilocos Norte completed its canvass on the afternoon of January 19, 1988.
The Certificate of Canvass of Votes indicated that Wilbur Go received 2,594 votes, constituting a plurality and leading to his proclamation as the winner.

On January 21, 1988, Cirilo Quilala filed SPC No. 88-214 with the Commission on Elections seeking:

The absence of a representative during the canvassing;
Lack of notice regarding the resetting of the canvass (time, place, and date); and
Prevention of Quilala’s representatives from witnessing the canvass by elements of the Philippine Marines.

On April 6, 1988, the Commission on Elections (Second Division) issued a decision dismissing SPC No. 88-214 and confirming the validity of the canvassing proceedings.
Further challenging the Commission’s ruling, on April 14, 1988, Quilala filed a petition for certiorari, prohibition, and other relief before the Court (G.R. No. 82726).

On April 21, 1988, while the petition for certiorari was pending, Quilala instituted an election protest (EPC No. 012-17) before the Regional Trial Court of Batac, alleging:

Rampant election irregularities.
Vote-buying and terrorism, which purportedly rendered the conduct of the election anomalous.
Fraudulent and illegal conduct resulting in Wilbur Go being declared Mayor.

On May 30, 1988, the Regional Trial Court of Batac, Branch 17 issued an Order that:

Struck off the records of petitioner Wilbur Go’s Answer to the election protest.
Cancelled the earlier Order (dated April 27, 1988) which had granted Go an extension of five days to file an answer.
Entered a general denial into the records, holding that failure to file the answer within the prescribed period (as provided under Sections 254(b) and (f) of the Omnibus Election Code) mandated such a denial.

A motion to reconsider the May 30, 1988 Order was filed by Wilbur Go but was subsequently denied.

The Court En Banc, in G.R. No. 82726 promulgated on August 13, 1990, dismissed the appealed election protest, thereby affirming the proclamation of Wilbur Go as duly elected Mayor.
The decision in G.R. No. 82726 became final and executory as of November 15, 1990.
As the merits of the underlying election protest were already disposed of, the present controversy in G.R. No. 83536, which raised only a procedural matter regarding the filing of a motion for extension of time to file an answer, became moot and academic.

Whether the filing of a motion for extension of time to file an answer, as provided for under Sections 254(b) and (f) of the Omnibus Election Code, is procedurally allowed in a case where the substantive issues have been finally adjudicated.
Whether the Court can entertain a petition for certiorari challenging a procedural order (i.e., the lower court’s Order affecting the extension and subsequent general denial) when the election protest has already been resolved on the merits, rendering such issues moot.