ChanRobles Virtual law Library

[ G.R. No. 105080. March 13, 2000]

KKMK-MWSS, et al., vs. PSLMC, et al.

THIRD DIVISION

Gentlemen:

Quoted hereunder, for your information, is a resolution of this Court dated MAR 13 2000.

G.R. No. 105080 (Kaisahan at Kapatiran ng mga Manggagawa at Kawani ng Metropolitan Waterworks and Sewerage System (KKMK-MWSS), Genaro Bautista, Meafiely Pantig, Dionisio Balignasay, Prudencio S. Cruz, Espiridon Talvo, Francisco Quiroligo, Bienvenido O. Ferrer, vs. Public Sector Labor Management Council (PSLMC), Hon. Patricia A. Sto Tomas, in her official capacity as chairperson of the PSLMC, Civil Service Commission; Hon Maria Nieves Confesor, Hon. Eduardo G. Montenegro, Hon. Jesus P. Estanislao; Hon. Salvador M. Enriquez, Jr. in their official capacities as Members of PSLMC; Civil Service Commission (CSC); Metropolitan Waterworks and Sewerage System (MWSS), Hon. Luis V. Sison in his Official capacity as MWSS Administrator and Hon Jose de Jesus, in his official capacity as Chairman of the MWSS Board.)

Before the Court is a Petition for Certiorari with Prayer for Preliminary Injunction & Temporary Restraining Order under Rule 65 of the Rules of Court assailing the: 1) Orders issued by the Public Sector Labor Management Council (PSLMC) on January 11, 1991, March 6, 1991, December 27, 1991 and April 21, 1992, respectively, in the case, entitled "MWSS v. KKMK-MWSS", PSLMC Case No. 00-04-91; (2) Metropolitan Waterworks and Sewerage System (MWSS) Decision in the administration case, entitled "MWSS v. Genaro Bautista et al", Adm. Case No. LD-77-88 (3) Memorandum Circular No. 6 and Section 3, Rule IX of the Implementing Rules and Regulations for E.O. 180 issued by the Civil Service Commission, as having been issued without jurisdiction or with grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction.

After having pursued the various pleadings filed by the parties in this case, the Court finds that petitioners failed to exhaust administrative remedies.

Exhaustion of administrative remedies requires that whenever there is an available administrative remedy provided by law, no judicial recourse can be taken until all such remedies have been availed of and exhausted.1 Aquino vs. Mariano, 129 SCRA 532, National Development Company vs. Hervilla, 151 SCRA 251.

The principle requires that appeals should go through the judicial hierarchy before recourse is made to the Supreme Court.

As aptly stated by the Court in Manila Public School Teachers Association v. Laguio Jr.: 2 200 SCRA 323, 335.

"Parties-litigants are duty bound to observe the proper order of recourse through the judicial hierarchy; they by-pass the rungs of the judicial ladder at the peril of their own causes. This Court is a court of last resort. Its review jurisdiction is limited to resolving questions of law where there is no dispute of the facts or the facts have already been determined by the lower tribunals, except only in criminal actions where capital penalties have been imposed."

WHEREFORE, the Petition is hereby DISMISSED.

SO ORDERED.

Very truly yours,

(Sgd.) JULIETA Y. CARREON

Clerk of Court

Back to Home | Back to Main

CLICK HERE FOR THE LATEST SUPREME COURT JURISPRUDENCE