Anda di halaman 1dari 5

[ G. R. No. 34163, September 18, 1931 ] GREGORIO PEDRO, PETITIONER AND APPELLANT, VS. T E PROVIN!IAL "OARD O# RI$AL ET AL.

, RESPONDENTS AND APPELLEES. DE!ISION VILLA%REAL, &.'

plaintiffs 0respondents1 jointly and severally to pay the damages claimed in the complaint" The follo!ing relevant facts are necessary for the decision of the ,uestion raised by the instant appeal# %n 2ay + $)*( there !as organized in the municipality of Caloocan Province of Rizal an association for the con3 struction and e4ploitation of cockpits called 56a .ociedad 7ighani"5 %n 2ay ** $)*( 8ugenio Tansioco the president of the association

This case is before us by virtue of the appeal taken by the petitioner Gregorio Pedro from the judgment of the Court of First Instance of Rizal dismissing his action for the annulment of an ordinance !ith costs against him"

applied to the municipal president of Caloocan and obtain a permit to construct a building of strong materials at Galas in said municipality to be used as cockpit upon payment of the proper fees" 984hibit $": ;hile the construction !as under !ay Pablo then president of Caloocan

In support of his appeal the appellant assigns the follo!ing alleged errors as committed by the trial court in its judgment to !it# $" *" The lo!er court erred in holding that %rdinance &o" '( series of $)*+ approved by the acting councillors is valid and legal" The lo!er court erred in denying the petitioner an ac,uired right not!ithstanding %rdinance &o" '- and the permit given him by the president in accordance there!ith '" The lo!er court erred in holding that the opening maintenance and operation of the Galas cockpit is injurious to the consumptive patients of the .antol .anatorium" /" The lo!er court erred in abstaining from making any ruling regarding the legality of the action taken by the provincial board suspending the effects of %rdinance &o" '- of the municipal council of Caloocan and in finally disapproving it according to the resolutions enacted by it and numbered $$'- series of $)*+ and $-/ series of $)*)" -" The lo!er court erred in dismissing this case and in not declaring permanent the injunction sought and in not sentencing the

addressed a communication to 8ugenio Tansioco on <une $- $)*( !arning him that the site of the building !as not the one designated by the chief of police and that it !as !ithin the radius of $ -== meters from the hospital of the Philippine >ntituberculosis .ociety in .antol in direct contravention of %rdinance &o" $- series of $)*( enacted on 2ay $/ $)*(" The permit having been annulled and the payments theretofore made forfeited the 5.ociedad 7ighani5 filed civil case &o" '=-'? in the Court of First Instance of 2anila on .eptember *$ $)*( against said Pablo Pablo as municipal president of Caloocan et al" for a preliminary injunction re,uiring them to refrain from impeding or obstructing the operation and e4ploitation of the 7ighani cockpit !hich at that time !as completed and ready to be thro!n open to the public" %n >ugust *( $)*? the Court of First Instance of 2anila rendered judgment absolving the defendants from the complaint !hich !as affirmed by this court on %ctober $- $)*+" 9Company 57ighani5 vs" Pablo -' Phil" ++(": %n .eptember $+ $)*? the municipal council of Caloocan enacted

%rdinance &o" '/ providing in the first section among other things that outside the barrios of 6oma Talipapa and &ovaliches !here only one cockpit might be established cockpits might be established at a distance of not less than $ -== meters from another licensed cockpit public schoolhouse or any hospital or charitable institution e4isting !ithin the municipal radius" >s a result of the general election held on <une - $)*+ in the municipality of Caloocan Rizal the municipal council formerly comprising Pablo Pablo as president 7ias 7ernardino as vice3president and .everino Panganiban @iego <usto 8steban .anchez Patricio Galuran Raymundo >ndres 8miliano .amson Aicente .evilla 6ucas Pascual Placido C" del 2undo @elfin Rodriguez <orge &adurata >nacleto Aictoria 8milio >cab and 2ateo >ustria as councillors !as substituted by another comprising the ne!ly elected @ominador >,uino as president @iego <usto as vice3 president and 7ias 7ernardino Flaviano de <esus Pedro Galang Celestino C" Celosa &icolas Carpio 6ucas Pascual 7asilio 7iglanga!a and 6ucas 7ustamante as councillors !ho !ere inducted into office on %ctober $(th of that year" %n @ecember *$ $)*+ the plaintiff herein Gregorio Pedro ac,uired by absolute sale all the rights and interests of the 5.ociedad 7ighani5 in the cockpit bearing its name" 984hibit 2": %n the same date @ecember *$ $)*+ said plaintiff Gregorio Pedro addressed a communication to the municipal council of Caloocan soliciting a permit to open operate maintain and e4ploit said cockpit for a period of four years binding himself to observe to the letter all municipal ordinances on cockpits" 984hibit >":

less than $ === meters from another licensed cockpit and -== meters from any hospital or charitable institution !ithin the municipality of Caloocan" 984hibit C": %n the same date @ecember *( $)*+ the municipal councillors of Caloocan 7ias 7ernardino Flaviano de <esus and Pedro Galang signed and for!arded to the provincial governor of Rizal an accusation against @ominador >,uino the municipal president and the other councillors !ho approved %rdinance &o" '- series of $)*+ alleging that they had been bribed to vote in favor of that ordinance" 984hibit /": The provincial governor endorsed the accusation to the provincial board of Rizal !hich through resolution &o" $$$= dated @ecember *? $)*+ ordered the temporary suspension of the members denounced pending the administrative investigation of the accusation" 7y virtue of said resolution &o" $$$= of the provincial board of Rizal and using one of the po!ers conferred upon him by la! the provincial governor of Rizal 8ligio &aval suspended the municipal president and the denounced members from their respective offices on @ecember *+ $)*+" 984hibits to -38": %n the same date @ecember *+ $)*+ bet!een ) and $= oBclock in the morning the appellant Gregorio Pedro paid into the municipal treasury the sum of P* =-= as a license fee on his cockpit for the first ,uarter of the year $)*) and the proper receipt 984hibit 6: and the permit 984hibit @: !ere issued to him authorizing him to operate maintain e4ploit and open to the public a day cockpit in the barrio of Galas Caloocan Rizal for a period of four years" %n @ecember *) $)*+ the municipal council ad interim in Caloocan

%n @ecember *( $)*+ the municipal council of Caloocan passed resolution &o" *=* approving %rdinance &o" '- series of $)*+ amending section $ of %rdinance &o" '/ series of $)*? providing among other things that only one cockpit could be established in each of the barrios of Galas 6oma Talipapa and &ovaliches and any other place outside said barrios provided in the latter case said cockpits are at a distance of not

passed resolution &o" ) series of $)*+ approving %rdinance &o" '( series of $)*+ suspending the effects of resolution &o" *=* of the suspended council approving %rdinance &o" '- series of $)*+ !hile a special committee created by the same ordinance investigated the e4pediency of permitting the e4ploitation and opening of the Galas cockpit at the site applied for by the proprietor Gregorio Pedro" 984hibit (":

and this bond !as accepted and approved by the respondent municipal %n the same date @ecember *) $)*+ the provincial board of Rizal passed resolution &o" $$'- suspending the effects of resolution &o" *=* of the municipal council of Caloocan approving %rdinance &o" '- series of $)*+ pending final decision on the validity of said ordinance by said board" 984hibit C": %n <anuary $( $)*) the @irector of the .antol Tuberculosis .anatorium addressed a communication to the temporary president of the municipal council of Caloocan Flaviano de <esus stating that a cockpit established in the barrio of Galas o!ing to the noise and clamor of the cro!d !ould retard the recovery of the patients in said sanatorium and !ould tend to increase the danger of spreading the disease among those visiting the cockpit" 984hibit $$: %n February $ $)*) the Chief of the 84ecutive 7ureau confirmed the resolution of the provincial board of Rizal holding the respondents in the administrative investigation mentioned above guilty of maladministration and imposing upon each of them a punishment of thirty daysB suspension" 984hibit ?": %n the same date February $ $)*) follo!ing the decision of the 84ecutive 7ureau mentioned above the provincial board of Rizal through resolution &o" $-/ disapproved said resolution &o" *=* of the municipal council of Caloocan approving %rdinance &o" '- series of $)*+" 984hibit $": %n February * $)*) the president of the third sanitary division of Rizal acting upon the appellantBs application filed on <anuary '= $)*) issued a certificate to the effect that after a proper inspection of the Galas cockpit he had found it to be in good sanitary condition" %n February ? $)*) Gregorio Pedro furnished a bond of P$= === in favor of the municipality of Caloocan to secure the payment of the fees accruing during the years from $)*) to $)'* !hich is the period included in the license issued to him for the opening and operation of his cockpit in Galas The appellant argues for the nullity of %rdinance &o" '( series of $)*+ approved on @ecember *) $)*+ by the temporary councillors appointed by the provincial governor of Rizal 8ligio &aval on the ground that 9$: it impairs the ac,uired rights of said appellantD 9*: it !as enacted on account of prejudice because it !as intended for a special and not a general purpose namely to prevent at any cost the opening maintenance and e4ploitation of the cockpit of the said petitioner3 %n February $- $)*) the respondent municipal president of Caloocan addressed a communication to the appellant Gregorio Pedro informing him that under no circumstance could said president permit the appellant to open his cockpit in Galas Caloocan to the public for %rdinance &o" '- series of $)*+ under !hich a permit had been given him to open and e4ploit his aforesaid cockpit had been dissapproved by the provincial board of Rizal in its resolution &o" $-/ series of $)*+ as a result of !hich the aforementioned ordinance became null and void" The first ,uestion to decide in this appeal is that raised in the first assignment of error to !it !hether %rdinance &o" '( series of $)*+ approved by the temporary councillors is valid" %n February $/ $)*) the appellant Gregorio Pedro sent the municipal president of Caloocan a communication informing him that having fulfilled all the re,uirements of the la! and the ordinances then in force he !ould open his cockpit in Galas to the public in the morning of February $? $)*)" 984hibit <": %n February $' $)*) councillor 6ucas 7ustamante submitted a resolution at a special session of the municipal council of Caloocan !hereby said council appealed to the 84ecutive 7ureau from the aforementioned resolution &o" $-/ of the provincial board of Rizal but the resolution did not pass o!ing to the lack of t!o3thirds of the members necessary !ith five members voting in favor and three against it" president @ominador >,uino and certified by the provincial treasurer <ose Aillegas" 984hibit 8":

appellantD and 9': it provides for special committee composed of persons !ho are not members of the council vested them !ith po!ers !hich of their very nature cannot be delegated by said council to that committee" The petitioner3appellant contends that having obtained the proper permit to maintain e4ploit and open to the public the cockpit in ,uestion having paid the license fee and fulfilled all the re,uirements provided by %rdinance &o" '- series of $)*+ he has ac,uired a right !hich cannot be taken a!ay from him by %rdinance &o" '( series of $)*+ !hich !as subse,uently approved" This court has already held that an ordinance regulating the functioning of cockpits does not create irrevocable rights and may be abrogated by another ordinance" 9Ainco vs" 2unicipality of Cinigaran /$ Phil" ?)=D <oa,uin vs" Cerrera '? Phil" ?=-D $* Corpus <uris )-+ sec" /)/D '? Corpus <uris $(+":

mentioned aboveD it occupies the same siteD and the same hygienic reasons !hich prompted the enactment of %rdinance &o" $- amended by %rdinance &o" '/ cited above e4ist no!D therefore !hen this !as amended by %rdinance &o" '- reducing the distance bet!een a cockpit and any hospital so that the 7ighani cockpit !ould be beyond said distance the municipal council !hich amended it acted !ith partiality to!ards a certain person namely the petitioner3appellant to the prejudice of the patients in the aforesaid sanatorium" >ccording to 8lliot in his !ork 52unicipal Corporations 5 cited by said petitioner3appellant himself said %rdinance &o" '- is void because it is partial" 98lliot 2unicipal Corporations sec" $/?D @illon 2unicipal Corporations p" )$-:" %rdinance &o" '( !hich seeks to correct said irregularity suspended the

The petitioner3appellant also contends that said %rdinance &o" '( !as passed due to prejudice 5because it !as intended for a special and not a general purpose namely to prevent at any cost the opening maintenance and e4ploitation of the cockpit of the said petitioner"5 The aforesaid %rdinance &o" '( !as not approved for the purpose of injuring the petitioner but to correct an irregularity consisting in the passage of %rdinance &o" '- !hich had been enacted to favor the said petitioner3 appellant" The 5.o3 ciedad 7ighani 5 from !hich the herein petitioner3 appellant ac,uired the o!nership of the cockpit here in ,uestion !as denied a license to operate it because it had been constructed in violation of %rdinance &o" $- series of $)*( later amended by %rdinance &o" '/ series of $)*?" The 5.ociedad 7ighani5 instituted proceedings against the pres3 ident and municipal council of Caloocan Rizal in civil case &o" '=-'? of the Court of First Instance of 2anila to prevent said defendants from impeding the operation and e4ploitation of the 7ighani cockpit and the court decided in favor of said defendants absolving them from the complaint on the ground among other reasons that the 7ighani cockpit had been constructed !ithin the prohibited distance from the >ntitubercular .anatorium of .antol and that decision !as affirmed by this court on appeal" 9Company 57ighani5 vs" Pablo supra": The cockpit in ,uestion no! is the former 7ighani cockpit

effects of said %rdinance &o" '- impliedly reestablishing %rdinance &o" '/ is therefore valid" The other reason given by the petitioner3appellant to sho! that %rdinance &o" '( is void is that the municipal council in approving it delegated its legislative po!ers to a special sanitary committee" .ection * of %rdinance &o" '( series of $)*+ provides as follo!s# 5.8C" *" > committee is hereby provided for to be composed of the president of the third sanitary division of Caloocan Rizal a practising physician residing in this municipality and a member of the municipal council !hose duty it shall be to make the necessary investigation to determine !hether or not the e4ploitation of the cockpit in the barrio of Galas for !hich Gregorio Pedro has applied for a permit !ould be injurious to any public or private interest" This special committee shall make such investigation and submit a report in due form to this municipal council !ithin the shortest time possible for its definite action"5 The municipal council of Caloocan pro tempore therefore does not delegate by that ordinance to the special committee thereby created any legislative function but only entrusts to it the study of the effect of the operation and e4ploitation of the cockpit under consideration upon public and private

interests in order to determine !hether or not the license should issue" Informational !ork of this nature o!ing to its technical character may be entrusted to technical committees" 9$* Corpus <uris +/(": Caving arrived at the conclusion that %rdinance &o" '( is valid and that the petitioner3appellant has ac,uired no irrevocable right by virtue of the license granted him under %rdinance &o" '- approved to favor him !hich is therefore void !e need not discuss the other assignments of error by the petitioner3appellant" ;herefore !e are of opinion and so hold# 9$: That a license authorizing the operation and e4ploitation of a cockpit is not property of !hich the holder may not be deprived !ithout due process of la! but a mere privilege !hich may be revoked !hen the public interests so re,uireD 9*: that the !ork entrusted by a municipal council to a special sanitary committee to make a study of the sanitary effects upon the neighborhood of the establishment of a cockpit is not legislative in character but only informational and may be delegatedD and 9': that an ordinance approved by a municipal council duly constituted !hich suspends the effects of another !hich had been enacted to favor the grantee of a cockpit license is valid and legal" 7y virtue !hereof finding no error in the judgment appealed from it is hereby affirmed !ith costs against the appellant" .o ordered" Avancea, C. J., Johnson, Street, Malcolm, Villamor, Ostrand, Romualdez and Imperial, JJ., concur"