ChanRobles Virtual law Library

[ G.R. No. 136491. February 22, 1999]

ENGR. MARIA JOEFEL B. MORON vs. NLRC, et al.

SECOND DIVISION

Gentlemen:

Quoted hereunder, for your information, is a resolution of this Court dated FEB 22, 1999.

G.R. No. 136491 (Engr. Maria Joefel B. Moron vs. National Labor Relations Commission et al.)

Acting on the motion of petitioner for an extension of fifteen (15) days from December 23, 1998 within which to file petition for certiorari, the Court RESOLVES to GRANT petitioner a period of THIRTY (30) DAYS for the purpose [not only fifteen (15) days as prayed for], with WARINING THAT NO FURTHER EXTENSION will be given.

In accordance with Rule 65 in relation to Rule 46, Rule 56 and other pertinent provisions of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure as amended governing petitions for certiorari, prohibition and mandamus filed with the Supreme Court, only petitions which comply strictly with the requirements specified therein shall be entertained. On the basis thereof, the Court RESOLVED to DISMISS the petition for certiorari for:

(a) failure to state the material date of receipt by petitioner of the assailed resolution of the National Labor Relations Commission in accordance with Section 3, Rule 46 as amended by Resolution dated July 21, 1998 of the Court En Banc in Bar Matter No. 803 in relations to Section 2, Rule 56;

(b) failure to submit a certification, duly executed by petitioner herself, that no other action or proceeding involving the same issues raised in this case has been files or is pending before the Court, the Court of Appeals, or is the different divisions thereof or any other tribunal or agency, with an undertaking to inform the Court within five (5) days from knowledge after filing of this petition of any similar case filed or is pending in any court or any other tribunal or agency in accordance with Section 1, Rule 65, Section 3, Rule 46 in relation to Section 2, Rule 56 and Section5, Rule 7; and

(c) failure to submit an affidavit of service of copy of the petition on private respondent in accordance with Section 13, Rule 13 in relations to Section 3, Rule 46 and Section 2, Rule 56.

Very truly yours,

TOMASITA M. DRIS

Clerk of Court

Back to Home | Back to Main

CLICK HERE FOR THE LATEST SUPREME COURT JURISPRUDENCE