G.R. No. 215650, March 28, 2023.
AUGUSTO L. SYJUCO, JR., PETITIONER, VS. JOSEPH EMILIO A. ABAYA, IN HIS CAPACITY AS SECRETARY OF THE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION AND COMMUNICATIONS; HONORITO D. CHANECO, IN HIS CAPACITY AS ADMINISTRATOR OF LIGHT RAIL TRANSIT AUTHORITY; AND RENATO Z. SAN JOSE, IN HIS CAPACITY AS OFFICER-IN-CHARGE OF THE METRO RAIL TRANSPORT 3 OFFICE, RESPONDENTS. (Consolidated with G.R. Nos. 215653, 215703, 215704, and 216735)

FACTS

The case involves consolidated petitions challenging Department Order No. 2014-014 (DO 2014-014) issued by then Department of Transportation and Communications (DOTC) Secretary Joseph Emilio A. Abaya, which imposed a uniform base fare of PHP 11.00 plus PHP 1.00 per kilometer for the Light Rail Transit (LRT) Lines 1 and 2 and the Metro Rail Transit (MRT) Line 3. The process began in August 2010 when the Office of the President directed the Light Rail Transit Authority (LRTA) to study fare hikes to reduce subsidies. A study was conducted and vetted by LRTA and DOTC officials. In January 2011, the LRTA Board provisionally approved the proposed fare adjustment. In compliance with Section 9(2) of Book VII, Chapter 2 of the Administrative Code of 1987, the LRTA Board scheduled public consultations for February 4 and 5, 2011, and published a Notice of Public Consultation in the Philippine Daily Inquirer on January 20, 2011, and The Manila Bulletin on January 27, 2011. The consultations resulted in opposition, leading the LRTA Board and DOTC to defer implementation in May 2011. The proposal was revived in June 2013 and, following a policy announcement by President Benigno Simeon Aquino III to remove subsidies, the LRTA Board resurrected the 2011 proposal in November 2013. Further public consultation was held on December 12, 2013. The LRTA Board confirmed the adjustment on December 18, 2013, and the Land Transportation Franchising and Regulatory Board (LTFRB) concurred on December 19, 2013. DO 2014-014 was issued on December 18, 2014, published on December 20, 2014, and took effect on January 4, 2015.

ISSUE

Whether Department Order No. 2014-014 complied with the publication requirement under Section 9(2) of Book VII, Chapter 2 of the Administrative Code of 1987, which states: “In the fixing of rates, no rule or final order shall be valid unless the proposed rates shall have been published in a newspaper of general circulation at least two (2) weeks before the first hearing thereon.”

RULING

Yes, Department Order No. 2014-014 complied with the publication requirement. The proposed fare adjustment (PHP 11.00 plus PHP 1.00/km) was published in a newspaper of general circulation on January 20, 2011, which was at least two weeks before the first public consultation (the “first hearing”) held on February 4, 2011. This same proposed adjustment was the basis for the final order, DO 2014-014. The statutory requirement is distinct from the public participation itself; it mandates publication of the proposed rates at least two weeks prior to the first hearing, which was satisfied. There is no requirement that the hearings must be held within a specific time frame before the final order’s adoption. The purpose of publication—to give the public notice and opportunity to submit views—was accomplished, as evidenced by the public consultations and the subsequent deferral of implementation based on public opposition. The proceedings involved a quasi-legislative function affecting the public en masse, not a contested case requiring a judicial-type hearing for specific parties. Therefore, the assailed department order is valid.