G.R. No. 159022 ; February 23, 2005
Mayor Edgardo G. Flores, petitioner, vs. Sangguniang Panlalawigan of Pampanga, Governor Manuel M. Lapid of Pampanga, Municipal Councilors Vanzalon F. Tizon, Romulo N. Mandap, Edgardo P. Yambao, Jerome M. Tongol, Marciano L. Sacdalan, and Ricky Y. Narciso, respondents.

FACTS

An administrative complaint for dishonesty and gross misconduct was filed by municipal councilors of Minalin, Pampanga, against Mayor Edgardo G. Flores before the Sangguniang Panlalawigan of Pampanga. The complaint alleged that on August 1, 2001, Flores executed a purchase request for communication equipment worth ₱293,000 without a supporting Sangguniang Bayan resolution or ordinance. The winning bidder, Kai Electronics, delivered the equipment on August 6, 2001, while bidding was ostensibly still ongoing. The equipment was alleged to be overpriced by over 100%. On September 9, 2002, the Sangguniang Panlalawigan issued an Order recommending to Governor Manuel Lapid that Flores be preventively suspended for sixty days.
Without filing a motion for reconsideration before the Sangguniang Panlalawigan, Flores sent a letter to Governor Lapid requesting a veto of the Order. Without awaiting the Governor’s action, Flores filed a petition for certiorari with the Court of Appeals, arguing the Sangguniang Panlalawigan committed grave abuse of discretion. The Court of Appeals dismissed the petition, ruling Flores failed to exhaust administrative remedies and that no grave abuse of discretion was evident from the evidence of overpricing and questionable bidding.

ISSUE

Whether the Court of Appeals erred in dismissing the petition for certiorari due to petitioner’s failure to exhaust administrative remedies.

RULING

The Supreme Court denied the petition and affirmed the Court of Appeals. The legal logic is firmly rooted in the doctrine of exhaustion of administrative remedies and the specific procedural requirements under the Local Government Code and the Rules of Court. Under Section 61 of the Local Government Code, a complaint against a municipal elective official is filed with the Sangguniang Panlalawigan, with its decision appealable to the Office of the President. This establishes a clear administrative hierarchy.
The Court emphasized that a motion for reconsideration of the Sangguniang Panlalawigan’s Order is a condition sine qua non before resorting to a special civil action for certiorari under Rule 65. This rule requires that there be no plain, speedy, and adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law; a motion for reconsideration constitutes such a remedy. By not filing this motion, Flores deprived the administrative body of the opportunity to correct any possible error. Furthermore, under Section 63 of the Local Government Code, the power to impose preventive suspension on a municipal mayor lies with the Provincial Governor. Flores filed his judicial petition without even awaiting Governor Lapid’s action on the recommendation, making his recourse premature. The Court found no concrete, compelling reason to dispense with these prerequisites. Thus, the petition was correctly dismissed for being procedurally infirm.