ChanRobles Virtual law Library

[G.R. No. 134243. February 17, 1999]

JESUS DIONY BONGALOS DADO vs. NLRC, et al.

SECOND DIVISION

Gentlemen:

Quoted hereunder, for your information, is a resolution of this Court dated FEB 17, 1999.

G.R. No. 134243 (Jesus Diony Bongalos Dado vs. National Labor Relations Commission, et al.)

The Court RESOLVES: (a) to GRANT the motion of the Solicitor General for first to third extension of time totalling ninety (90) days from November 21, 1998 and the motion of private respondent for an extension of fifteen (15) days from December 12, 1998, all within which to file their respective comments on the petition for certiorari; and (b) to NOTE [1] the aforesaid comment of private respondent dated December 24, 1998; [2] private respondent's ex-parte manifestation dated December 14, 1998 submitting therewith additional copies of the motion for extension of time to file the aforesaid comment and the registry receipt to prove that the said motion was filed with this Court by mail; [3} the manifestation and motion of the Solicitor General and that of private respondent, both requesting that petitioners be required to furnish them with copies of the petition; and [4] the compliance of the Public Attorney's Office, counsel for petitioners, submitting therewith proofs of personal service of copies of the petition on Atty. Emmanuel B. Canilao, counsel for private respondent, and on the Solicitor General.

Consistent with the pronouncement of this Court in St. Martin Funeral Home vs. National Labor Relations Commission, et al., G.R. No. 130866, September 16, 1998, that all references in the amended Section 9 of B.P. No. 129 to supposed appeals from the National Labor Relations Commission to the Supreme Court are interpreted to mean and refer to petitions for certiorari under Rule 65 of the Rules of Court, and that consequently, all such petitions should henceforth be initially filed in the Court of Appeals in strict observance of the doctrine on the hierarchy of courts as the appropriate forum for the relief desired, the Court further RESOLVES to REFER this case to the Court of Appeals for appropriate action and disposition.

Very truly yours,

TOMASITA B. MAGAY-DRIS

Clerk of Court

Back to Home | Back to Main

CLICK HERE FOR THE LATEST SUPREME COURT JURISPRUDENCE