G.R. No. 154243 - Lastimoso vs. Asayo

On August 5, 1971, the Public Service Commission granted Batangas Laguna Tayabas Bus Co., Inc. (BLTB) CPCs to operate:

On April 4, 1975, Pantranco South Express, Inc. (PANTRANCO) filed a complaint before the Board of Transportation (BOT) docketed as Case No. 75-31-C, accusing BLTB of abandoning services on the said lines from August 1971 to April 1975 and prayed for cancellation of BLTB's CPCs.
On March 24, 1976, PANTRANCO filed an urgent petition in Cases Nos. 70-5749, 70-5750, and 70-5751, charging abandonment from March 1975 to March 1976 and further praying for cancellation.
BLTB did not file formal written answers but in a July 26, 1978 motion, admitted non-operation during hearings held in 1977 and advanced defenses citing extraneous factors beyond their control.

Registration of all twenty-eight buses under Public Utility Bus (PUB) denomination.
Industry-wide difficulties preventing operation:

Cancellation is a severe penalty affecting both operator and the public.
Evidence to justify cancellation must be strong; mere non-operation without willful and contumacious refusal is insufficient.
BLTB was justified from September 2, 1972 by citing unfinished road construction, a fact uncontested and never overruled by BOT.
BOT considered public need paramount, especially due to insufficient operation of authorized units by PANTRANCO (less than 50% from 1974-1977).
There was a public clamor for transportation services along those lines, reinforced by government developmental projects benefiting the Bicol region.

Abuse of discretion and excess of jurisdiction for refusing to cancel BLTB’s CPCs despite abandonment.
Reliance on an allegedly excluded BLTB letter dated September 2, 1972.
Consideration of extraneous facts unsupported by evidence.

On September 23, 1972, the Public Service Commission was abolished; its functions transferred to the BOT.
On June 19, 1987, the Land Transportation Franchising and Regulatory Board (LTFRB) succeeded the BOT in exercising its functions.

Whether the Board of Transportation committed grave abuse of discretion or acted without or in excess of jurisdiction when it refused to cancel BLTB's certificates of public convenience despite alleged abandonment of services.
Whether the BOT erred or acted improperly by considering BLTB’s letter dated September 18, 1972, allegedly not part of the case records.
Whether the BOT’s reliance on extraneous facts outside the record to prioritize public need over penalizing BLTB was improper.