Case Digest (G.R. No. 252063)
Facts:
Mandaue City College (MCC) was established as a city college through Mandaue City Ordinance No. 10-2005-324A and initially operated for school year 2006–2007 under Dr. Paulus Mariae L. Canete as its administrator. In June 2007, MCC’s Board of Trustees issued Twin Resolutions directing Dr. Canete to cease and desist from further functions and appointing Dr. Susana Cabahug as caretaker, after which two MCC operations allegedly existed under different administrators and locations.
Commission on Higher Education (CHED) investigated and found deficiencies, leading to CHED’s cease and desist orders and, for MCC under Dr. Canete, a Closure Order dated December 3, 2010 and a Notice to the Public dated July 4, 2011 stating that its degrees were spurious and illegal. MCC under Dr. Canete petitioned the RTC, Branch 216, Quezon City to nullify the CHED actions, but the RTC dismissed the petition; the Court of Appeals affirmed, and the closure and notice were upheld on appeal.
Issues:
- Whether the CA erred in affirming CHED’s authority to issue the school Closure Order.
- Whether the CA erred in upholding the Closure Order and Notice to the Public issued by CHED against MCC.
Ruling:
The Supreme Court held that CHED had jurisdiction to regulate post-secondary institutions, including the power to impose sanctions such as program termination or school closure, and that this authority included issuing closure orders against errant higher educational institutions.
It further held that MCC under Dr. Canete could not rely on automatic recognition under Section 27 of BP 232 because it failed to show that it was the same government-operated institution authorized by the MCC Board; after the Board’s Twin Resolutions, Dr. Canete lacked authority to continue as President/administrator. The Court found no convincing basis to overturn the RTC and CA factual findings that the Cabahug-administered MCC complied with CHED directives while MCC under Dr. Canete did not, and thus denied the petition.
Ratio:
Under RA 7722, as implemented by its IRR, CHED was vested with the powers and functions to monitor higher education programs and impose sanctions, including school closure, as part of the statutory regulatory mandate for quality education. The Court therefore rejected the view that CHED’s role was merely recommendatory.
On the merits, the Court treated MCC under Dr. Canete as a “rogue” operation because the MCC Board had revoked his authority through the Twin Resolutions and there was no showing that these were later recalled or that the revised ordinance conferred continuing legitimacy on his administration. Given the absence of adequate proof of compliance with CHED requirements, the Court sustained the CHED Closure Order and Notice to the Public, and found no cogent reason to disturb the lower courts’ consistent factual conclusions.
Doctrine:
- RA 7722 authorizes CHED to monitor higher educational institutions and impose sanctions, including program termination and school closure.
- The argument of automatic recognition under Section 27 of BP 232 does not prevail where the operation in question lacks authority from the creating/controlling school governing body.
- Courts will not substitute their judgment for CHED’s regulatory determination of compliance and can sustain closure when the evidence fails to show compliance with CHED directives.
- MCC-Board authority governs legitimacy of administration; acts performed by an officer after removal for cause and without renewed mandate lack lawful foundation for claiming continued operation as the recognized institution.