October 1964 - Philippine Supreme Court Decisions/Resolutions
Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence
Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence > Year 1964 > October 1964 Decisions >
G.R. No. L-20304 October 30, 1964 - PERFECTO FAYPON v. SALVADOR L. MARIÑO:
EN BANC
[G.R. No. L-20304. October 30, 1964.]
PERFECTO FAYPON, Petitioner, v. SALVADOR L. MARIÑO, FELICISIMO R. ROSETE and ALEJANDRO E. SEBASTIAN, Respondents.
Crispin D. Baizas & Associates for Petitioner.
Solicitor General for Respondents.
SYLLABUS
1. ADMINISTRATIVE LAW; PUBLIC OFFICERS; PETITION FOR REINSTATEMENT BECOMES MOOT UPON EXPIRATION OF TERM OF OFFICE. — A petition for reinstatement to a public office becomes moot and academic upon the expiration of petitioner’s term of office, without his being reappointed, during the pendency of the case.
R E S O L U T I O N
REYES, J.B.L., J.:
Petitioner, Perfecto Faypon, filed this petition for the annulment of the order of the Executive Secretary, dated September 6, 1962, suspending the petitioner from the office of Director of the Philippine Virginia Tobacco Administration; to compel said Executive Secretary to allow petitioner to exercise the rights and functions and restore him to the full use and enjoyment of such office; and enjoin the Executive Secretary from proceeding with the administrative investigation of charges filed against him.
Upon application by the petitioner, this Court, on December 21, 1962, adopted the following resolution:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph
"Passing upon the petition for mandatory injunction filed by petitioner on December 7, 1962, in case G.R. No. L-20304 (Perfecto Faypon v. Salvador L. Mariño, Et. Al.), and the opposition of the Solicitor General; considering that the period of suspension has become unreasonable because: (a) the petitioner was suspended on September 6, 1962 up to the present time, for a period of three and a half months; (b) the administrative investigation does not appear to have been continued during the said period, notwithstanding that the Supreme Court has not issued any writ of preliminary injunction; and (c) the petitioner’s term of office expires on January 3, 1963, THE COURT RESOLVES to grant the injunction prayed for and order the reinstatement of petitioner (Garcia v. Executive Sec’y, L-19748, promulgated September 13, 1962) upon his filing of a bond of P200."cralaw virtua1aw library
and the bond having been posted on the same day, the preliminary injunction was duly issued.
The administrative investigation against petitioner was terminated on May 10, 1963.
It being admitted that the petitioner’s term of office expired on January 3, 1963, without his being reappointed, the present case has now become moot and academic.
WHEREFORE, the above-entitled case a dismissed, for being moot, without costs.
Bengzon, C.J., Bautista Angelo, Concepcion, Barrera, Paredes, Dizon, Regala, Makalintal, Bengzon, J.P. and Zaldivar, JJ., concur.
Upon application by the petitioner, this Court, on December 21, 1962, adopted the following resolution:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph
"Passing upon the petition for mandatory injunction filed by petitioner on December 7, 1962, in case G.R. No. L-20304 (Perfecto Faypon v. Salvador L. Mariño, Et. Al.), and the opposition of the Solicitor General; considering that the period of suspension has become unreasonable because: (a) the petitioner was suspended on September 6, 1962 up to the present time, for a period of three and a half months; (b) the administrative investigation does not appear to have been continued during the said period, notwithstanding that the Supreme Court has not issued any writ of preliminary injunction; and (c) the petitioner’s term of office expires on January 3, 1963, THE COURT RESOLVES to grant the injunction prayed for and order the reinstatement of petitioner (Garcia v. Executive Sec’y, L-19748, promulgated September 13, 1962) upon his filing of a bond of P200."cralaw virtua1aw library
and the bond having been posted on the same day, the preliminary injunction was duly issued.
The administrative investigation against petitioner was terminated on May 10, 1963.
It being admitted that the petitioner’s term of office expired on January 3, 1963, without his being reappointed, the present case has now become moot and academic.
WHEREFORE, the above-entitled case a dismissed, for being moot, without costs.
Bengzon, C.J., Bautista Angelo, Concepcion, Barrera, Paredes, Dizon, Regala, Makalintal, Bengzon, J.P. and Zaldivar, JJ., concur.
