Case Summary (G.R. No. 128509)
Background Facts
Roble Arrastre, Inc. was granted a short-term permit by the Philippine Ports Authority (PPA) to conduct cargo handling services. The petitioner was denied the renewal of Business Permit No. 276 by the Municipal Mayor, which led to a Petition for Mandamus filed in the Regional Trial Court (RTC) against the Mayor, asserting that the denial was a neglect of duty. The Mayor cited Municipal Resolution No. 93-27, which restricted entities operating shipping lines on certain routes from also providing cargo handling services, as the basis for the denial.
Issues Before the RTC
Roble Arrastre argued that the mayor’s power to issue the business license was ministerial and should not be used to exercise discretion. The mayor contended that such discretion was necessary due to the provisions of the Local Government Code that endowed her with regulatory powers to issue and revoke permits based on local policy and public interest.
RTC Ruling
The RTC ruled in favor of Roble Arrastre, determining that the PPA has exclusive authority to grant or deny permits related to cargo handling, resolving that the mayor’s refusal to approve the application was not supported by law. The RTC found the resolution passed by the Sangguniang Bayan not legally binding, as it was not an ordinance but merely a declaration and that the PPA had already granted a contract to Roble Arrastre.
Appellate Court's Ruling
The Court of Appeals overturned the RTC's ruling, stating that the mayor’s decision-making involves discretion related to the issuance of permits, thus mandamus was not a proper remedy. The appellate court also found that because the business permit for 1994 had already become moot by the time of the appeal, the case should be dismissed, noting the necessity of evaluating each application for business permits based on the current context and compliance with applicable regulations.
Legal Analysis
On review, the Supreme Court echoed the Appeals Court’s conclusion that the mayor’s discretion in issuing business permits is inherent in the regulatory nature of the power conferred by the Local Government Code of 1991. It was clarified that such discretion is not merely a conduit for revenue generation but includes evaluating public interest and business ethics.
Writ of Mandamus
The Court reiterated that a writ of mandamus can only compel the performance of a ministerial act but cannot be applied to situat
...continue readingCase Syllabus (G.R. No. 128509)
Case Background
- The case involves a Petition for Review on Certiorari filed by Roble Arrastre, Inc. against Hon. Altagracia Villaflor and the Court of Appeals, challenging their decision that reversed the Regional Trial Court's ruling.
- Roble Arrastre, Inc. is a cargo handling service operator authorized by the Philippine Ports Authority (PPA) to provide services at the Municipal Port of Hilongos, Leyte, under Permit No. M92-005.
- The company had been granted business permits for the years 1992 and 1993 by the then Municipal Mayor, Altagracia Villaflor.
- On December 14, 1993, pending renewal of its business permit, the PPA issued a 90-day hold-over authority to Roble Arrastre, Inc., stipulating revocation if an earlier permit was granted.
Denial of Business Permit
- On January 27, 1994, the company applied for a renewal of its business permit, which was subsequently denied by Mayor Villaflor.
- The denial was based on Municipal Resolution No. 93-27, which prohibited entities operating shipping lines along the Cebu-Hilongos route from engaging in arrastre and stevedoring services at the Hilongos port.
- Roble Arrastre, Inc. contended that the mayor's refusal was a neglect of duty and that issuing permits was a ministerial function, not requiring discretion.
Legal Proceedings
- Roble Arrastre, Inc. filed a Petition for Mandamus with the RTC, asserting that the mayor's refusal was unjustified.
- The mayor countered that the issuance of permits involved discretion, arguing that her decision was based on the l