GR 163088; (July, 2006) (Digest)
G.R. No. 163088 July 20, 2006
PHILIPPINE COCONUT AUTHORITY, petitioner, vs. PRIMEX COCO PRODUCTS, INC., respondent.
FACTS
Executive Order No. 826 required the Philippine Coconut Authority (PCA) to authorize new desiccated coconut plants, subject to Presidential approval. In 1990, Primex Coco Products, Inc. applied for registration with the PCA. After a mandamus suit, the PCA Board, via Resolution No. 044-92 dated October 20, 1992, approved Primex’s application but explicitly made it “subject to the final approval of the President of the Philippines.” However, in March 1993, the PCA issued Resolution No. 018-93 deregulating the industry and subsequently granted Primex a Certificate of Registration. In 1998, the Supreme Court in G.R. No. 110526 nullified Resolution No. 018-93 and all certificates issued under it for being ultra vires. Following this nullification, Primex filed a new petition for mandamus to compel the PCA to issue it a license, arguing the 1992 Board Resolution constituted final approval.
ISSUE
Whether a writ of mandamus may issue to compel the PCA to grant an operating license to Primex.
RULING
No, mandamus does not lie. The Court held that the PCA Board Resolution No. 044-92 of October 20, 1992, which approved Primex’s application, was unequivocally conditional. It was expressly made “subject to the final approval of the President of the Philippines.” This Presidential approval was a mandatory statutory requirement under E.O. No. 826, constituting a suspensive condition that had to be fulfilled before any ministerial duty to issue a license could arise. Since there was no showing that this condition was ever met, the PCA’s duty to issue the license never became absolute, clear, and imperative. Mandamus is a remedy to compel the performance of a ministerial duty that is already due. It cannot be used to enforce a duty that remains contingent upon an unfulfilled condition. The subsequent deregulation via the void Resolution No. 018-93 did not cure this defect or create a ministerial duty, as that resolution was declared null and void ab initio. Therefore, Primex had no clear legal right to the license, and the PCA had no corresponding present duty to issue one. The petition for mandamus was properly dismissed.