Case Digest (G.R. No. L-36385)
Case Digest (G.R. No. L-36385)
Facts:
Arcadio R. Tolentino v. Hon. Amado Inciong and Domingo Cinco, G.R. No. L-36385, July 25, 1979, Supreme Court Second Division, Fernando, C.J., writing for the Court.On December 12, 1972 private respondent Domingo Cinco filed a verified complaint with the then National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) charging petitioner Arcadio R. Tolentino, as president of the Batangas Labor Union, with refusing to call the union's officer elections scheduled for November 1972, and praying that the election be conducted immediately. Upon receipt, Tolentino sought cancellation of the NLRC hearing set for January 12, 1973 by telegram (January 9) and by a formal motion filed January 11, 1973, because he had to appear before the then Court of Industrial Relations.
Despite these filings, on January 30, 1973 the NLRC issued an order directing the Batangas Labor Union to hold elections within twenty days under supervision of the Registrar of Labor Relations; Tolentino received a copy on February 5 and moved for reconsideration on February 8, asserting lack of due process (the Union was not a party) and lack of subject-matter jurisdiction under the NLRC rules. When no action followed, Tolentino filed a notice of appeal with the Secretary of Labor on February 20, 1973 and asked the Secretary to suspend a pre-election conference (Feb. 22) and the election (scheduled Mar. 3).
On February 26, 1973 the Batangas Labor Union filed a petition for prohibition with preliminary injunction in the Court of First Instance (CFI), Branch No. VII, Balayan, Batangas (Civil Case No. 942), naming Cinco, the NLRC and the Secretary of Labor and seeking annulment of the NLRC's January 30 order. The CFI, presided by Judge Jaime delos Angeles, did not grant an ex parte injunction but set hearing for March 1, 1973; after hearing the judge reserved decision. Within the CFI premises petitioner and the judge were served with a subpoena dated February 28, 1973 issued by NLRC Chairman Amado G. Inciong, requiring Tolentino to appear on March 2, 1973 before the NLRC to explain why he should not be held in contempt for allegedly using "old society tactics" to prevent the ordered union election.
Tolentino filed a petition for prohibition with preliminary injunction in the Supreme Court on March 2, 1973. On March 6, 1973 the Court required respondents to answer within ten days and issued a temporary restraining order (TRO) effective immediately. Chairman Inciong sent a letter (March 14, 1973) asserting the issue was academic because the election had already been held, denying Supreme Court jurisdiction in view of Presidential Decree No. 21 (PD 21), and stating the NLRC would not pursue contempt. The Court expunged the letter and ordered compliance with its March 6 resolution. An answer filed April 2, 1973 reiterated that the matter was moot and invoked Sections 7 and 10 of PD 21 as authority to punish for contempt. Neither party filed memoranda; the case was submitted for decision.
Issues:
- Is a writ of prohibition proper to restrain the NLRC and its Chairman from enforcing the contempt citation and related order?
- Did the NLRC Chairman have authority under Presidential Decree No. 21, specifically Sections 7 and 10, to cite a trial judge and a party who had sought judicial relief for contempt?
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)