GR 108886; (May, 1995) (Digest)
G.R. No. 108886 . May 5, 1995. AQUILES U. REYES, petitioner, vs. REGIONAL TRIAL COURT OF ORIENTAL MINDORO, BRANCH XXXIX, COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, ADOLFO G. COMIA, AND THE SANGGUNIANG BAYAN OF NAUJAN, ORIENTAL MINDORO, respondents.
FACTS:
Petitioner Aquiles Reyes and private respondent Adolfo Comia were candidates for the Sangguniang Bayan of Naujan, Oriental Mindoro in the May 11, 1992 elections. The Municipal Board of Canvassers proclaimed Reyes as the eighth winning candidate on May 13, 1992. Comia filed an election protest before the Regional Trial Court (RTC) on June 1, 1992, alleging a mathematical error in the Statement of Votes (CE Form No. 20-A) which credited him with only 858 votes instead of his correct total of 915 votes. The Board of Canvassers admitted the mistake. The RTC denied Reyes’s motion to dismiss (which argued the protest was filed beyond the 10-day reglementary period) and subsequently annulled Reyes’s proclamation, declaring Comia the winner.
Reyes appealed to the COMELEC. Simultaneously, he filed a petition for mandamus and prohibition in the Court of Appeals (CA) to compel the Sangguniang Bayan to recognize him. The CA dismissed this petition due to the pending COMELEC appeal, citing rules against multiple petitions. The COMELEC’s First Division later dismissed Reyes’s appeal for failure to pay the required appeal fee within the prescribed period. Reyes then filed the present petition for certiorari, prohibition, and mandamus directly with the Supreme Court.
ISSUE
Whether the Supreme Court should grant the petition, considering the procedural defects in its filing and the antecedent proceedings.
RULING
The Supreme Court dismissed the petition for lack of merit. The Court held that the petition was procedurally infirm. Under Article IX, A, Section 7 of the Constitution , only decisions, orders, or rulings of the COMELEC en banc may be brought to the Supreme Court via certiorari. Since the challenged order was issued by the COMELEC’s First Division, and Reyes failed to file a motion for reconsideration to elevate the matter to the COMELEC en banc, the direct recourse to the Supreme Court was impermissible. The requirement of a prior motion for reconsideration is jurisdictional in a special civil action for certiorari under Rule 65.
Furthermore, the Court found no grave abuse of discretion in the COMELEC First Division’s dismissal of the appeal for non-payment of the appeal fee, as such payment is a mandatory requirement for perfecting an appeal. On the substantive issue, Reyes was also estopped from questioning the RTC’s jurisdiction over the election protest. By actively appealing the RTC decision to the COMELEC and filing a separate petition in the CA, he effectively submitted to the RTC’s jurisdiction and waived any objection thereto. The Sangguniang Bayan had already recognized and seated Comia following the RTC decision.