Case Digest (G.R. No. L-7708)
Facts:
Jose Mondano v. Fernando Silvosa, G.R. No. L-7708, May 30, 1955, the Supreme Court, Padilla, J., writing for the Court. The petitioner, Jose Mondano, was the duly elected and qualified mayor of the municipality of Mainit, Province of Surigao. On February 27, 1954, Consolacion Vda. de Mosende filed a sworn complaint with the Presidential Complaints and Action Committee charging Mondano with (1) rape of her daughter Caridad Mosende and (2) concubinage for cohabiting with the daughter outside the conjugal dwelling.On March 6, 1954 the Assistant Executive Secretary indorsed the complaint to respondent Fernando Silvosa, Provincial Governor of Surigao, requesting immediate investigation, appropriate action and report. On April 10, 1954 Mondano appeared before Governor Silvosa, was served with a copy of the complaint which the governor filed with the Provincial Board, and on the same day Silvosa issued Administrative Order No. 8 suspending Mondano from office. The Provincial Board thereafter proceeded to hear the charges over Mondano’s objection.
Mondano petitioned the Supreme Court for a writ of prohibition with preliminary injunction to enjoin respondents from further proceedings before the Provincial Board and to declare the suspension illegal. A writ of preliminary injunction was issued on May 4, 1954 upon the filing and approval of a P500 bond. Respondents admitted the factual allegations but defended their actions by invoking section 79(c) of the Revised Administrative Code and the rule in Villena v. Secretary of Interior to justify departmental authority to invest...(Pro-only)
Issues:
- Did the Provincial Governor have authority under section 79(c) of the Revised Administrative Code or the constitutional allocation of executive power to investigate and suspend the municipal mayor for the crimes charged?
- Do the offenses of rape and concubinage fall within the grounds enumerated in section 2188 of the Revised Administrative Code such that the Provincial Governor and Provincial Board could proceed administratively (including suspension and trial by the Board)?
- Was the suspension of the petitioner and the Provincial Board’s hear...(Pro-only)
Ruling:
- (Pro-only)
Ratio:
- (Pro-only)
Doctrine:
- (Pro-only)