Case Digest (G.R. No. 67125)
Facts:
Philippine Veterans Bank Employees Union‑NUBE et al. v. Philippine Veterans Bank et al., G.R. Nos. 67125 and 82337, August 24, 1990, Supreme Court En Banc, Cruz, J., writing for the Court.Petitioners in G.R. No. 67125 were the Philippine Veterans Bank Employees Union‑NUBE and individual employees; respondents were the Philippine Veterans Bank (later renamed Philippine Military and Veterans Bank) and its officers. Petitioners in G.R. No. 82337 were Simeon C. Medalla and others purporting to represent the remaining 510,000 veterans (or their heirs); respondents included the Central Bank of the Philippines (as liquidator of PVB), the Liquidation Court (RTC, Branch 39, Manila), the Secretary of the Budget and the National Treasurer. The two cases were consolidated for decision.
The factual and procedural history began when the Monetary Board placed the Philippine Veterans Bank (PVB) under receivership on April 10, 1983 (Resolution No. 334). On April 26, 1984 the Employees Union filed a petition challenging the Bank’s retrenchment and reorganization program (docketed G.R. No. 67125) and obtained a temporary restraining order on May 9, 1984. The Monetary Board later ordered liquidation by Resolution No. 612 dated June 7, 1985, precipitating supplemental petitions (September 25, 1985) and intervention by the Veterans Federation of the Philippines (November 26, 1985). The Court issued a writ of preliminary injunction on March 26, 1987 enjoining the Central Bank and liquidator from liquidating PVB and from disposing of assets except for ordinary administration and specified employee claims.
Separately, Medalla et al. filed an original petition for restitution and extraordinary writs on March 18, 1988 (docketed G.R. No. 82337), seeking declaration of entitlement to ownership, possession and control of PVB and various orders directing government officials to provide financial assistance. The petitions were consolidated. Meanwhile the RTC (Judge Abelardo M. Dayrit) ordered payments of employee claims (June 11, 1987) and later retirement benefits for two former directors (October 21, 1988), enforcement of which the Court temporarily restrained by order of January 12, 1989. The March 26, 1987 injunction was amended December 15, 1988 to permit certain sales of foreclosed properties, and further ancillary petitions and motions to lift the injunction were filed in 1989–1990 by various claimants and depositors. The Court delayed resolution pending Executive efforts at rehabilitation (Special Presidential Committee created by Administrative Orders Nos. 29, 62 and 90) but ultimately proceeded to decide the consolidated original petitions fi...(Pro-only)
Issues:
- Does the Central Bank (Monetary Board) have the power under existing law to place the Philippine Veterans Bank under receivership, conservatorship or liquidation?
- Was the petition in G.R. No. 82337 (an original petition for restitution and extraordinary writs) within the Supreme Court’s jurisdiction and proper in form to obtain the reliefs prayed for against the Central Bank and other government officials?
- Are the employee‑petitioners entitled to back wages because of their separation following the Bank’s liquidation, and are retired directors Marking and Mejia entitled ...(Pro-only)
Ruling:
- (Pro-only)
Ratio:
- (Pro-only)
Doctrine:
- (Pro-only)