Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence


Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence > Year 1969 > April 1969 Decisions > G.R. No. L-28805 April 28, 1969 - NATIONAL POWER CORPORATION SUPERVISORS’ UNION v. NATIONAL POWER CORPORATION, ET AL.:




PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

EN BANC

[G.R. No. L-28805. April 28, 1969.]

NATIONAL POWER CORPORATION SUPERVISORS’ UNION, Petitioner, v. NATIONAL POWER CORPORATION, NATIONAL POWER CORPORATION EMPLOYEES AND WORKERS ASSOCIATION, ATTY. SIMPLICIO S. BALCOS and HONORABLE JUDGE ARSENIO MARTINEZ as Presiding Judge of the Court of Industrial Relations, Respondents.


SYLLABUS


1. REMEDIAL LAW; PROVISIONAL REMEDY; PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION; HEARINGS FOR DETERMINATION OF PAY TO BE RECEIVED BY MOVANTS NOT IN VIOLATION THEREOF; INSTANT CASE. — Where the writ of preliminary injunction in question mainly restrains the respondent NPC from making deductions from the salary differentials and/or salary increases of the supervisors of the NPC corresponding to 20% attorney’s fees payable to respondent Atty. Simplicio Balcos, and to this effect further restrained the respondent Judge from taking and conducting further proceedings in Case No. 81-IPA in so far as it involves or affects herein petitioner, hearings to be held by the Court of Industrial Relations in relation to its order of January 8, 1968, for the purpose of determining the pay to be received by movants, and even for the purpose of determining the question of whether or not they belong to the supervisors class, will not violate said writ of preliminary injunction issued by this Court, as long as no order is issued providing for deductions from the salary differentials or increases of the supervisors of the NPC, or granting any relief adversely affecting petitioner.


R E S O L U T I O N


DIZON, J.:


On April 16, 1968, upon motion of herein petitioner, We issued a writ of preliminary injunction to this effect:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph

"NOW, THEREFORE, until further orders from this Court, You (respondent National Power Corporation) are hereby restrained from making any deductions from the salary differentials and/or salary increases of the supervisors of the NPC corresponding to 20% attorney’s fee payable to the respondent Atty. Simplicio S. Balcos; and You (respondent Hon. Judge Arsenio Martinez) are hereby restrained from taking and conducting any further proceedings in Case No. 81-IPA of the Court of Industrial Relations, entitled ‘NPC Employees and Workers Association versus National Power Corporation, respondent; National Power Corporation Supervisors’ Union, movant’, insofar as it involves and/or affects herein petitioner."cralaw virtua1aw library

On February 28, 1969 Carmen Quilop and others, through Atty. Jimenez B. Buendia, filed a motion praying for the issuance of an order clarifying whether or not the above injunction applies to them, and if it does not, to authorize the Court of Industrial Relations to proceed with hearings to determine the pay that movants should receive in the light of Republic Act No. 4657 (Teves Law) and the provisions of the existing Collective Bargaining Agreement between the National Power Corporation and the National Power Employees and Workers Association.

It appears that in connection with an agreement supplemental to the existing collective bargaining agreement between the Corporation and the Association, approved by the Court of Industrial Relations in its order of January 8, 1968, a petition was filed on March 27 of said year to implement said order. The Court, resolving said motion, ruled that the salary or pay to be received by the movants, considering the provisions of Republic Act 4657 (Teves Law) and those of the basic collective bargaining agreement "will be determined by the Court" and, as a matter of fact, set the case for hearing in connection therewith on November 26, 1968. This hearing, however, was not held in view of the objection interposed by the National Power Corporation Employees and Workers Association who claimed that the holding thereof would violate the writ of preliminary injunction issued by Us.

In connection with the motion under consideration, We required the interested parties to submit their comments. Petitioner, through counsel, submitted its comments on March 18, 1969 saying, in effect, that as movants are not its members, petitioner is not concerned in any proceedings below as long as they do not in any manner affect or involve its rights and interests and those of its members. For its part, the National Power Corporation Employees and Workers Association, through counsel, submitted its comments on March 26, 1969 objecting to the holding of the hearing until such time as the question of whether movants are supervisors has been determined and suggesting that their remedy is to move for a reconsideration of the court’s order dated February 27, 1969 holding in abeyance the proceedings in Case No. 81-IPA until after the Supreme Court has dissolved the writ of preliminary injunction issued by it in this case and/or the status of the movants has been finally determined.

The writ of preliminary injunction in question mainly restrains the respondent NPC from making deductions from the salary differentials and/or salary increases of the supervisors of the NPC corresponding to 20% attorney’s fees payable to respondent Atty. Simplicio Balcos, and to this effect further restrained the respondent Judge from taking and conducting further proceedings in Case No. 81- IPA in so far as it involves or affects herein petitioner.

It is our view, therefore, that hearings to be held by the Court of Industrial Relations in relation to its order of January 8, 1968, for the purpose of determining the pay to be received by movants, and even for the purpose of determining the question of whether or not they belong to the supervisors class, will not violate the writ of preliminary injunction thus issued by this Court, as long as no order is issued providing for deductions from the salary differentials or increases of the supervisors of the NPC, or granting any relief adversely affecting petitioner herein.

Reyes, J.B.L., Makalintal, Zaldivar, Sanchez, Fernando, Teehankee and Barredo, JJ., concur.

Concepcion, C.J., and Castro, J., are on leave.

Capistrano, J., did not take part.




Back to Home | Back to Main


chanrobles.com



ChanRobles Professional Review, Inc.

ChanRobles Professional Review, Inc. : www.chanroblesprofessionalreview.com
ChanRobles On-Line Bar Review

ChanRobles Internet Bar Review : www.chanroblesbar.com
ChanRobles CPA Review Online

ChanRobles CPALE Review Online : www.chanroblescpareviewonline.com
ChanRobles Special Lecture Series

ChanRobles Special Lecture Series - Memory Man : www.chanroblesbar.com/memoryman





April-1969 Jurisprudence                 

  • G.R. No. L-25924 April 18, 1969 - EDUARDO Z. ROMUALDEZ, ET AL. v. FRANCISCO ARCA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-27833 April 18, 1969 - IN RE: ARSENIO GONZALES v. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS

  • G.R. No. L-29113 April 18, 1969 - PAZ M. GARCIA v. CLAUDIO TEEHANKEE, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-30052 April 18, 1969 - CAMILO V. PEÑA Y VALENZUELA, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS

  • G.R. No. L-20953 April 21, 1969 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. FELIPE T. VILLAS

  • G.R. No. L-26489 April 21, 1969 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ODONCIO TARRAYO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-21492 April 25, 1969 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ENRIQUITO TAPITAN, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-22452 April 25, 1969 - GEORGE KALITAS v. CATALINO LIDO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-22799 April 25, 1969 - TOMAS L. LANTING v. RESTITUTO GUEVARRA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-22945 April 25, 1969 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ARASA HAN, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-23652 April 25, 1969 - IN RE: GO AY KOC v. REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL.

  • G.R. No. L-24166 April 25, 1969 - FIREMAN’S FUND INSURANCE COMPANY v. MANILA RAILROAD COMPANY, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-24508 April 25, 1969 - CENTRAL SAWMILLS, INC. v. ALTO SURETY & INSURANCE CO., ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-25438 April 25, 1969 - IN RE: WILLIAM SAY CHONG HAI v. REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL.

  • G.R. No. L-25709 April 25, 1969 - RIZAL SURETY & INSURANCE COMPANY v. CUSTOMS ARRASTRE SERVICE, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-26602 April 25, 1969 - IN RE: LIM CHUY TIAN v. REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL.

  • G.R. No. L-26416 April 25, 1969 - IN RE: JULIO CHUA LIAN YAN v. REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL.

  • G.R. No. L-26524 April 25, 1969 - PHILIPPINE EDUCATION CO., INC. v. MANILA PORT SERVICE, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-26789 April 25, 1969 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. DICTO ARPA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-29910 April 25, 1969 - ANTONIO FAVIS v. CITY OF BAGUIO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-20122 April 28, 1969 - FELICIANO A. CASTRO v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-20268 April 28, 1969 - VENANCIO CASTAÑEDA, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-24163 April 28, 1969 - REGINO B. ARO v. ARSENIO NAÑAWA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-24813 April 28, 1969 - HERMENEGILDO SERAFICA v. TREASURER OF ORMOC CITY, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-25437 April 28, 1969 - IN RE: YAP EK SIU v. REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL.

  • G.R. No. L-27347 April 28, 1969 - JOSE D. VILLEGAS, ET AL. v. ALFREDO FERNANDO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-27588 April 28, 1969 - LUZON STEVEDORING CORPORATION v. WORKMEN’S COMPENSATION COMMISSION, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-28805 April 28, 1969 - NATIONAL POWER CORPORATION SUPERVISORS’ UNION v. NATIONAL POWER CORPORATION, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-29930 April 28, 1969 - BENITO ARTUYO v. FRANCISCO GONZALVES, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-20374 April 28, 1969 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. SYLVIA ABONITALLA DE RAVIDAS

  • G.R. No. L-21483 April 28, 1969 - COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE v. COURT OF TAX APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-22418 April 28, 1969 - FELIX LIMON v. ALEJO CANDIDO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-22012 April 28, 1969 - OTILLA SEVILLA, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-23282 April 28, 1969 - FELIPE GANOB, ET AL. v. REMEDIOS RAMAS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-22587 April 28, 1969 - RUFINO BUENO, ET AL. v. MATEO H. REYES, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-28747 April 28, 1969 - PAZ M. GARCIA v. CLAUDIO TEEHANKEE, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-21690 April 29, 1969 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. EPIFANIO PUJINIO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-22341 April 29, 1969 - JOSE RAMOS v. HONORATO GARCIANO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-23973 April 29, 1969 - CIPRIANO VERASTIQUE, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-25094 April 29, 1969 - PAN AMERICAN WORLD AIRWAYS, INC. v. PAN AMERICAN EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-25883 April 29, 1969 - CALTEX (PHILIPPINES) INC. v. CALTEX DEALERS ASSOCIATION OF THE PHILIPPINES, INC., ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-19906 April 30, 1969 - STERLING PRODUCTS INTERNATIONAL, INC. v. FARBENFABRIKEN BAYER AKTIENGESELLSCHAFT, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-22382 April 30, 1969 - REPUBLIC MANUFACTURING CO., INC. v. MANILA RAILROAD COMPANY

  • G.R. No. L-24273 April 30, 1969 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. PEDRO FIGUEROA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-24507 April 30, 1969 - ARSENIO REYES v. REYNALDO B. CHAVOSO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-24402 April 30, 1969 - PEDRO V. C. ENRIQUEZ v. SECRETARY OF FINANCE, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-25604 April 30, 1969 - PAULO RODRIGUEZ, ET AL. v. ABRAJANO & CO., INC.

  • G.R. No. L-26679 April 30, 1969 - JOAQUIN UYPUANCO v. EQUITABLE BANKING CORPORATION, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-27010 April 30, 1969 - MARLENE DAUDEN-HERNAEZ v. WALFRIDO DELOS ANGELES, ET AL.