Case Digest (G.R. No. 100588)
Facts:
University of San Agustin, Inc., et al., G.R. No. 100588, March 07, 1994, Supreme Court Second Division, Nocon, J., writing for the Court. Petitioners are University of San Agustin, Inc. (USA), Dean Sister Concepcion Cajilig and several clinical instructors; respondents are five former third‑year nursing students (and their parents/guardians) who sought to be readmitted.The respondents were refused re‑admission by USA for the summer of 1989 and for the last two semesters of school year 1989–1990 on the ground that they failed to meet the school's retention policy — a minimum grade of 80% in any major nursing subject (including Nursing 104) and in two minor subjects. Respondents claimed the refusal prejudiced their right to choose their field and to finish their degree and sought a writ of mandamus from the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Iloilo City, also praying for damages.
The RTC (order dated September 15, 1989) dismissed the petition, holding that mandamus would not lie to compel re‑admission for academic deficiencies and that USA’s action fell within academic freedom; the court relied on the students’ signed admission agreements and on precedent declining to second‑guess academic discretion. The Court of Appeals (CA) reversed in a decision dated April 23, 1991, finding respondents’ grades (77–78% in Nursing 104) were passing under the usual 75% standard and that contractual stipulations raising the readmission threshold to 80% were contrary to public policy and could not defeat the statutory/constitutional right to continue a course absent academic deficiency or disciplinary violation; the CA ordered USA to re‑admit respondents as fourth‑year students.
Before the CA decision, petitioners moved to dismiss as moot (April 4, 1991), asserting respondents had enrolled in and later graduated from Lanting College of Nursing in October 1990; the CA merely noted the motion ...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Is the petition for mandamus moot and academic because respondents had already enrolled in and graduated from another nursing school?
- Was mandamus available to compel USA to re‑admit respondents — i.e., did respondents show a clear legal right and a corresponding ministerial duty on the part of USA?
- If mandamus were available, did USA lawfully exercise academic discretion in refusing re‑admission based on its 80% s...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)