EN BANC
[G.R. No. L-29945. June 30, 1970.]
BINGING HO, Petitioner, v. THE COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS and BONSAN GO, Respondents.
Jose W. Diokno and Roger C. Berbano for Petitioner.
Ambrosio Padilla and Francisco Cuenco for respondent Bonsan Go.
Ramon Barrios for respondent Commission on Elections.
SYLLABUS
1. REMEDIAL LAW; CERTIORARI; DISMISSAL OF PETITION WHERE RELIEF SOUGHT GRANTED IN ANOTHER CASE. — Where the prior appeal of the petitioner from the order of the trial court regarding the canvass of a certain precinct on the basis of the judicial canvass return has already been decided by the Supreme Court, the subsequent petition (which is the instant case) filed by the same petitioner to annul and set aside the orders of the COMELEC setting aside its proclamation as mayor-elect during the pendency of the appeal has become moot and academic, the relief prayed for by him in effect having been achieved in that other case.
R E S O L U T I O N
MAKALINTAL, J.:
Petitioner Binging Ho and respondent Bonsan Go were among the candidates for the position of Mayor in the municipality of Bongao, Sulu, in the regular elections held on November 14, 1967. On November 27, 1967 Binging Ho filed a petition for judicial recount of votes in precinct No. 13 on the ground of material discrepancies in certain entries in the election return. The recount having been conducted, the Court on March 26, 1968, issued an order for the municipal board of canvassers of Bongao "to convene and make the canvass of Precinct No. 13 . . ., using the judicial canvass return so that the canvass for all the precincts of the municipality of Bongao would be completed and after the canvass the Municipal Board of Canvassers, Bongao, Sulu, shall proclaim the winning candidate, whoever he is . . ."cralaw virtua1aw library
From the aforegoing order Bonsan Go appealed to this Court, where the case was docketed as Case G.R. No. L-29051. The notice of appeal was filed on April 3, 1968.
On June 6, 1968 the Commission on Elections, acting on a petition of Bonsan Go to hold in abeyance the canvass of the votes in precinct No. 13, according to the judicial return, denied the same and ordered the municipal board of canvassers to complete the canvass and proceed with the proclamation of the winning candidate for Mayor. On July 9, 1968, however, having been informed that the decision of the Court of First Instance of Sulu in the judicial recount case had been appealed, the Commission on Elections issued a resolution "to hold in abeyance the implementation of the resolution . . . of June 6, 1968 until final disposition of the case by the Supreme Court, and until further orders from the Commission."cralaw virtua1aw library
In the meantime, on June 13, 1968, Binging Ho was proclaimed by the municipal board of canvassers; and on July 10, 1968, he was again proclaimed by the municipal council of Bongao, acting as canvassing board. These two proclamations were set aside by the Commission on Elections in a resolution promulgated October 22, 1968, wherein the resolution of July 9, 1968 was reiterated. Binging Ho moved to reconsider, but his motion was denied on December 10, 1968, one of the grounds of the denial being the pendency in this Court of the appeal in the judicial recount case, "the outcome of (which) will affect the mayoralty election in Bongao, Sulu, because the case involves a judicial determination of the true and correct result of the election for mayor in said municipality . . ."cralaw virtua1aw library
Against the aforesaid orders of October 22 and December 10, 1968 Binging Ho filed the instant petition before us, praying that they be annulled and set aside, alleging that his proclamation on June 18, 1968 was made pursuant to the directive of the Commission on Elections itself dated June 6, 1968 and in accordance with the order of the Court of First Instance of Cebu in the judicial recount case. Respondents filed their respective answers to the petition, and thereafter petitioner submitted his memorandum in lieu of oral argument.
On July 28, 1969 the appeal from the order of the Court of First Instance of Sulu (G.R. No. L-29051) was decided by this Court, the dispositive portion of the decision being as follows:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph
"FOR THE FOREGOING CONSIDERATIONS, the orders appealed from are affirmed. The Municipal Board of Canvassers of Bongao, Sulu, is hereby ordered to convene, in 3 days from receipt of this decision, for the purpose of canvassing the returns from all the precincts in the municipality including the judicial return from Precinct No. 13, and immediately thereafter, to proclaim the winning candidate for the position of Municipal Mayor on the basis of the total votes appearing in the returns. Costs against the respondent-appellant."cralaw virtua1aw library
In view of the said decision it is clear that the instant petition has become moot and academic, the relief prayed for by petitioner in effect having bean achieved by him in that other case. Wherefore the petition is dismissed, without costs.
Concepcion, C.J., Reyes, J.B.L., Dizon, Zaldivar, Castro, Fernando, Teehankee and Barredo, JJ., concur.
Villamor, J., is on leave.
From the aforegoing order Bonsan Go appealed to this Court, where the case was docketed as Case G.R. No. L-29051. The notice of appeal was filed on April 3, 1968.
On June 6, 1968 the Commission on Elections, acting on a petition of Bonsan Go to hold in abeyance the canvass of the votes in precinct No. 13, according to the judicial return, denied the same and ordered the municipal board of canvassers to complete the canvass and proceed with the proclamation of the winning candidate for Mayor. On July 9, 1968, however, having been informed that the decision of the Court of First Instance of Sulu in the judicial recount case had been appealed, the Commission on Elections issued a resolution "to hold in abeyance the implementation of the resolution . . . of June 6, 1968 until final disposition of the case by the Supreme Court, and until further orders from the Commission."cralaw virtua1aw library
In the meantime, on June 13, 1968, Binging Ho was proclaimed by the municipal board of canvassers; and on July 10, 1968, he was again proclaimed by the municipal council of Bongao, acting as canvassing board. These two proclamations were set aside by the Commission on Elections in a resolution promulgated October 22, 1968, wherein the resolution of July 9, 1968 was reiterated. Binging Ho moved to reconsider, but his motion was denied on December 10, 1968, one of the grounds of the denial being the pendency in this Court of the appeal in the judicial recount case, "the outcome of (which) will affect the mayoralty election in Bongao, Sulu, because the case involves a judicial determination of the true and correct result of the election for mayor in said municipality . . ."cralaw virtua1aw library
Against the aforesaid orders of October 22 and December 10, 1968 Binging Ho filed the instant petition before us, praying that they be annulled and set aside, alleging that his proclamation on June 18, 1968 was made pursuant to the directive of the Commission on Elections itself dated June 6, 1968 and in accordance with the order of the Court of First Instance of Cebu in the judicial recount case. Respondents filed their respective answers to the petition, and thereafter petitioner submitted his memorandum in lieu of oral argument.
On July 28, 1969 the appeal from the order of the Court of First Instance of Sulu (G.R. No. L-29051) was decided by this Court, the dispositive portion of the decision being as follows:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph
"FOR THE FOREGOING CONSIDERATIONS, the orders appealed from are affirmed. The Municipal Board of Canvassers of Bongao, Sulu, is hereby ordered to convene, in 3 days from receipt of this decision, for the purpose of canvassing the returns from all the precincts in the municipality including the judicial return from Precinct No. 13, and immediately thereafter, to proclaim the winning candidate for the position of Municipal Mayor on the basis of the total votes appearing in the returns. Costs against the respondent-appellant."cralaw virtua1aw library
In view of the said decision it is clear that the instant petition has become moot and academic, the relief prayed for by petitioner in effect having bean achieved by him in that other case. Wherefore the petition is dismissed, without costs.
Concepcion, C.J., Reyes, J.B.L., Dizon, Zaldivar, Castro, Fernando, Teehankee and Barredo, JJ., concur.
Villamor, J., is on leave.
