G.R. No. L-33535. January 17, 1975.
SERGIO M. ISADA, in his capacity as Acting General Manager of the National Waterworks & Sewerage Authority (NWSA) and in his personal capacity, petitioner, vs. JUDGE JUAN L. BOCAR as Judge, Court of First Instance of Manila, Branch XVI; ANGELINO S. PASCUAL, FRANCISCO R. UNTALAN, ALEJANDRO S. REYES, ROLANDO M. MAZO, ICASIANO M. SANTOS, SEVERINO MATEO, BENJAMIN M. TULALI, TEODORO M. SALINAS, and more than 700 others in a class suit; GENARO C. BAUTISTA, in his capacity as attorney-in-fact of NWSA Employees Housing Project; and RELITO M. PUMARADA, in his capacity as Chairman of the Housing Project Implementation Committee created by employees-awardees for the implementation of the NWSA Employees Housing Project, respondents.

FACTS

The National Waterworks and Sewerage Authority (NWSA), pursuant to a collective bargaining agreement and a housing program, segregated 58 hectares of its land for an employee housing project. A raffle selected 1,411 awardees. The NWSA Board approved resolutions to sell the raw land to the employees’ unions at a minimal price, with a mechanism for individual lot allocation and financing through the Government Service Insurance System (GSIS). Key resolutions authorized the mass preparation of transfer certificates of title to individual awardees, with a notation of a mortgage in favor of NWSA for the unpaid balance, and authorized the Acting General Manager to execute individual deeds of sale. The petitioner, Acting General Manager Sergio M. Isada, refused to sign the prepared deeds of sale, prompting the employee-awardees to file a petition for mandamus with a prayer for a mandatory preliminary injunction in the Court of First Instance of Manila.
The respondent judge granted the mandatory preliminary injunction, ordering petitioner Isada to execute the deeds of sale. Isada filed this petition for certiorari and prohibition, arguing that the respondent judge acted with grave abuse of discretion because the execution of the deeds was a discretionary act requiring his personal judgment and that the subdivision plan for the lots lacked final approval from the Quezon City Council and other agencies at the time the injunction was issued.

ISSUE

Whether the respondent judge committed grave abuse of discretion in issuing a mandatory preliminary injunction compelling the petitioner to execute deeds of sale for the housing project lots.

RULING

The Supreme Court dismissed the petition, upholding the respondent judge’s orders. The legal logic is anchored on the principle that a mandatory injunction may issue where the plaintiff’s right is clear and the act to be performed is ministerial, not discretionary. The Court found that the petitioner’s duty to sign the deeds was not a matter of personal discretion but a ministerial duty arising from the NWSA Board’s resolutions, which had the force of law within the corporation. The Board’s Resolutions Nos. 154-’69 and 283-’69 explicitly authorized the Acting General Manager to sign the deeds; thus, his refusal constituted a dereliction of a duty imposed by his own board. The act of signing was a mere mechanical implementation of a prior corporate decision.
The Court further reasoned that the alleged lack of final subdivision plan approval was not a valid justification for refusal, as such approval was a subsequent procedural step that would logically follow the corporation’s commitment and did not affect the existence of the clear contractual right vested in the awardees. The injunction served to prevent further delay of a long-pending social justice measure for government employees. The Court emphasized the government’s role in aiding employee welfare and housing, noting that delaying the project would undermine this objective. Since the petitioner’s duty was clear and ministerial