Case Summary (G.R. No. L-34253)

Timeliness of Petitions for Inclusion/Exclusion of Voters

• The 214 verified petitions for the exclusion/inclusion of voters were presented for filing to the clerk of court during regular office hours on October 19, 1971.
• It was the ministerial duty of the clerk to receive and docket these petitions, even if the physical work of docketing extended beyond office hours.
• The prohibition against receiving petitions outside regular office hours was inapplicable since the petitions were presented during those hours.
• The physical act of docketing, which may have taken longer due to the volume of petitions, did not violate the intent of the law.

Clerk's Officious Requirement for Affidavits of Service

• The clerk's suggestion that petitioners' counsel attach separate affidavits of service for each petition was deemed officious and unnecessary.
• Each verified petition already contained proof of notice, albeit not in the most precise terms, making the additional affidavits surplusage.
• The clerk overstepped his ministerial role by questioning the sufficiency of the proof of notice, which is a judicial function reserved for the court.
• The clerk's actions delayed the docketing of the petitions, adversely affecting the public interest.

Judicial Responsibility to Order Docketing of Petitions

• The failure of the clerk to perform his ministerial duty necessitated action from the judge to order the docketing of the petitions.
• Only 21 petitions were docketed, leaving 193 undocketed and unable to be heard on the scheduled date.
• The judge was required to ensure that the undocketed petitions were processed and assigned to various branches of the court for prompt hearing.
• Notice of hearing must be delivered personally or left with a responsible person at the residence of the voters named in the petitions.

Granting of Writ of Mandamus

• The petition for a writ of mandamus was granted to compel the clerk to docket the 193 und...continue reading

Case Syllabus (G.R. No. L-34253)

Case Overview

• This case is an original action for a writ of mandamus filed by petitioners Luz Batioco and Virgilio Gerolaga against Hon. Pedro J.L. Bautista, the Executive Judge of the Court of First Instance of Pasay City, and Lorenzo Sta. Ana, the Clerk of Court.
• The petitioners sought to compel the respondents to docket 193 verified petitions for the exclusion of over 6,000 allegedly fictitious voters in Pasay City.
• The Court granted the petition, ordering that the petitions be heard and resolved before the impending election day on November 8, 1971.

Background of the Case

• The petitioners presented a total of 214 verified exclusion petitions for filing on October 19, 1971, during regular office hours.
• The petitions were prepared following a house-to-house canvass conducted by the Pasay Citizens League for Good Government and the Progresibong Kabataan ng Pasay, with authorization from the Commission on Elections (Comelec).
• Upon presentation, the receiving clerk refused to accept the petitions, citing the absence of proof of service of notice to the parties as required by law.

Events Leading to the Petition

• Petitioners' counsel, Atty. Dizon, initially agreed to the clerk's suggestion to provide separate affidavits of service for each petition.
• Atty. Dizon returned later with the requi...continue reading