June 1978 - Philippine Supreme Court Decisions/Resolutions

Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence

Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence > Year 1978 > June 1978 Decisions > G.R. No. L-28653 June 8, 1978 - PAZ M. GARCIA v. FRANCISCO DE LA ROSA:

SECOND DIVISION

[G.R. No. L-28653. June 8, 1978.]

PAZ M. GARCIA, Petitioner, v. HON. FRANCISCO DE LA ROSA, Judge of the Court of First Instance, Branch VII, Pasay City, Respondent.

[G.R. No. L-28679. June 8, 1978.]

PAZ M. GARCIA, Petitioner, v. HON. FRANCISCO DE LA ROSA, Judge of the Court of First Instance, Branch VII, Pasay City, Respondent.

[G.R. No. L-29403. June 8, 1978.]

PAZ M. GARCIA, Petitioner, v. HON. JUDGE FRANCISCO DE LA ROSA, LORENZO C. STA. ANA, LUIS M. DE GUZMAN, BELEN ROGACION, and Pat. JOSE MANIQUIZ, ERNESTO REYES and Major DELFIN FRANCISCO, Respondents.

[G.R. No. L-29470. June 8, 1978.]

PAZ M. GARCIA, Petitioner, v. THE HON. FRANCISCO DE LA ROSA, Judge of the Court of First Instance, Branch VII, Pasay City, MR. LORENZO STA. ANA, Clerk of Court and LUIS DE GUZMAN, Deputy Clerk, Court of First Instance, Pasay City, Branch VII, Respondents.

[G.R. No. L-30495. June 8, 1978.]

PAZ M. GARCIA, Petitioner, v. HON. JUDGE FRANCISCO DE LA ROSA, Branch VII, Court of First Instance of Pasay City, LORENZO C. STA. ANA, Clerk of Court, Court of First Instance, Pasay City, LUIS M. DE GUZMAN, Deputy Clerk, Branch VII, Court of First Instance of Pasay City, Respondents.

SYNOPSIS

Petitioner. a stenographer and assistant clerk of court of the Court of First Instance of Rizal, Pasay City, Branch VII was dismissed from the service by the Secretary of Justice pursuant to Letter of Instruction No. 14-A during the pendency of five (5) related cases she filed with the Supreme Court against the respondents. Required by the Supreme Court to comment regarding said development, respondents averred that by reason of petitioner’s dismissal and her presence now abroad, revival and continuation of the contempt proceedings against her would be futile and therefore the cases may be treated as moot. They cited the rule that the power to punish for contempt is exercised on the preservative and not on the vindicative principle, implying that the objective of the contempt proceedings had already been attained.

In view thereof, the Supreme Court dismissed the five related cases and considered them closed.

SYLLABUS

1. ACTION; DISMISSAL; MOOT AND ACADEMIC. — Where during the pendency of five related original actions filed by petitioner against respondent judge, petitioner was dismissed from the service by the Secretary of Justice pursuant to Letter of Instruction No. 14-A and had gone abroad, the said cases will be dismissed and considered closed for being moot.

2. CONTEMPT; POWER TO PUNISH FOR CONTEMPT, CONCEPT. — The power to punish for contempt is exercised on the preservative and not on the vindicative principle or on the corrective and not on the retaliatory idea of punishment.

3. ID.; EXERCISE OF POWER; EFFECT AGAINST ONE BEYOND THE JURISDICTION. — Where the person object of contempt proceedings had gone abroad, it would be futile to revive and continue contempt proceedings against him.

R E S O L U T I O N

AQUINO, J.:

These five related cases were brought by Paz M. Garcia, a stenographer and assistant clerk of court of the Court of First Instance of Rizal, Pasay City Branch VII, against the Presiding Judge thereof, Hon. Francisco de la Rosa.

In L-28653, Paz M. Garcia filed on February 15, 1968 a petition for certiorari wherein she assailed two orders of Judge De la Rosa (1) holding her in direct contempt of court for quarrelling with the clerk of court while the Judge was working in his chamber and fining her P200 and (2) charging her with indirect contempt for disobeying the order requiring her to turn over to the clerk of court certain records.

In L-28679, Paz M. Garcia on February 21, 1968 filed a petition for habeas corpus because Judge De la Rosa ordered her imprisonment for six days in the Pasay city jail for having committed direct contempt in that at the hearing on February 19, 1968 before the said Judge, she said that the latter was harassing her. This Court ordered her provisional release.chanrobles.com : virtual law library

In L-29403, Paz M. Garcia filed on August 23, 1968 another petition for habeas corpus because on August 22, 1968 Judge de la Rosa found her guilty of direct contempt and ordered her confinement in jail for shouting and causing alarm and disturbance in court. She was released on bail pursuant to this Court’s resolution of August 23, 1968.

In L-29470, Paz M. Garcia filed on September 6, 1968 a petition for prohibition and mandamus against Judge De la Rosa, his clerk of court and deputy clerk of court to restrain them from allegedly harassing her and for the transfer to another Judge of the two contempt cases against her.

On October 8, 1968 she filed a supplemental petition for habeas corpus, seeking her release from her confinement in the Pasay city jail. On October 8, 1968 Paz M. Garcia was provisionally released on bail pursuant to a resolution of this Court.

In L-30495, Paz M. Garcia filed on May 15, 1969 against Judge De la Rosa, his clerk of court and deputy clerk of court a petition for certiorari wherein she questioned the institution of contempt proceedings against her and the other acts of the respondents.

In a decision of the Commissioner of Civil Service dated January 2, 1970 Paz M. Garcia was found guilty of gross misconduct and neglect of duty and was dismissed from the service. She assailed that decision in this Court by means of certiorari. Her petition was dismissed in the resolution of September 23, 1970 because her remedy was an appeal to the Civil Service Board of Appeals (L-31934).

The Civil Service Board of Appeals in a decision dated October 15, 1971 found that she was not guilty of gross misconduct. It found her guilty of neglect of duty and ordered her suspension for three months without pay.

She assailed that decision in her petition for certiorari, mandamus and prohibition filed on September 16, 1972. The petition was dismissed in the resolution dated September 26, 1972 (L-35515, Garcia v. Civil Service Board of Appeals).

She filed administrative charges against Judge De la Rosa on January 29 and 31, 1968. She imputed to him gross ignorance of the law, dishonesty, oppression, grave misconduct and incompetence. All the charges were dismissed in this Court’s per curiam resolution of October 6, 1972 (Administrative Cases Nos. 124-M and 127-J).

All the said five cases were filed by Paz M. Garcia when she was still in the service. On October 24, 1972, she was dismissed by Secretary of Justice Vicente Abad Santos pursuant to Letter of Instruction No. 14-A.

In view of that dismissal, this Court, in its resolution of March 1, 1978, required her and the respondents, Judge De la Rosa, his clerk of court and deputy clerk of court, to state whether these cases have become moot and academic.chanrobles law library : red

The respondents in a compliance dated March 22, 1978 stated that the petitions in these five cases "may be treated as moot and academic" because, by reason of petitioner’s dismissal and the fact that she is now abroad, it would be futile to revive end continue the contempt proceedings against her (See Velasco v. Rosenberg, 29 Phil. 212).

The respondents, implying that the objective of the contempt proceedings had already been attained, cited the rule that the power to punish for contempt is exercised on the preservative and not on the vindictive principle or on the corrective and not on the retaliatory idea of punishment.

Finding respondents’ observations to be well-taken, these five cases are dismissed and considered closed.

SO ORDERED.

Fernando (Chairman), Barredo, Antonio and Santos, JJ., concur.

Concepcion, Jr., J., took no part.

Back to Home | Back to Main