Case Digest (G.R. No. L-26833)
Facts:
San Rafael Homeowners Association, Inc. and Jacinto C. Leano; Balut Women’s Club, Inc., Dr. Severino Lopez and Dr. Tomas Josef v. City of Manila, Hon. Antonio J. Villegas, Manuel Cudiamat, Jose Erestain, Fernando Manalastas and Jose F. Sugay, G.R. Nos. L-26833-34, July 28, 1972, Supreme Court En Banc, Makalintal, J., writing for the Court.
The petitioners (two separate groups, later consolidated) sought writs of prohibition (one case also sought mandamus) with preliminary injunctions in the Court of First Instance (CFI) of Manila to restrain the City of Manila and members of its Committee on Awards from conducting public bidding for the construction and establishment of an incinerator-thermal plant for garbage and refuse disposal. The respondents were the City of Manila and the city officials who composed the Awards Committee, including then Mayor Antonio J. Villegas.
Since 1955 the City had studied refuse disposal; Ordinance No. 5274 (15 November 1965) authorized establishment of a garbage/refuse disposal plant and appropriated P15,000,000, directing the city to operate the plant on a self-liquidating basis and requiring bidders to disclose equipment origin and specifications. Pursuant to the ordinance, bids were invited in February 1966: six proposals were received (four compost plants, one incinerator-thermal plant, one combined). The acting City Public Service Officer recommended the incinerator-thermal bid; the National Science Development Board (NSDB), however, deemed all bids deficient but, considering health and marketability, recommended the incineration-thermal power option as most advantageous.
The Committee on Awards conducted hearings (12 April–9 May 1966) and, on 19 May 1966, rejected all bids for failing to meet the self-liquidating requirement. New specifications (24 May 1966) were prepared, defining “Garbage and Refuse Disposal Plant” to include a “pollution-free incinerator” and prescribing detailed equipment, revenue estimates, and air pollution control conforming to the standards of the Model Smoke Law of the American Society of Mechanical Engineers. An Invitation to Bid was published (Official Gazette, July 1966) with initial deadlines later postponed.
Petitioners filed Civil Case No. 65992 (5 July 1966) and Civil Case No. 66179 (22 July 1966) in the CFI seeking to stop the rebidding; ex parte restraining orders were issued but were lifted in one instance after hearing. The two suits were consolidated (30 July 1966). No formal trial was held; parties submitted documents, expert opinions and depositions. The CFI promulgated a joint decision on 5 November 1966 denying the writs and dismissing the petitions. Respondents reset the bid date and published notice for rebidding (Manila Chronicle, 10 November 1966). Petitioners sought injunctive relief in the Supreme Court and a temporary restraining order issued on 15 November 1966 enjoining the scheduled bidding pending resolution.
Petitioners argued the incinerator proposal was beyond the respondents’ authority because an incinerator is a nuisance per se and because the bidding and specifications violated Ordinance No. 5274, the City Charter (R.A. No. 409), the Revised Administrative Code (Sec. 607), and the Local Autonomy Act; they also contended the specifications were so broad as to preclude competitive bidding ...(Pro-only)
Issues:
- Did the trial court err in denying the petitions for writs of prohibition/mandamus and preliminary injunction to enjoin the City’s advertised rebidding for an incinerator-thermal plant?
- Did the City of Manila exceed its authority or violate Ordinance No. 5274, the City Charter (R.A. No. 409), the Revised Administrative Code (Sec. 607) or the Local Autonomy Act in confining the invitation to bid to an incinerator-thermal system and in the content of its specifications (including the self-liquidating requirement and pollution-control terms)?
- Was there a failure of the publication and bidding formalities required by the...(Pro-only)
Ruling:
- (Pro-only)
Ratio:
- (Pro-only)
Doctrine:
- (Pro-only)