G.R. No. L-25619 June 30, 1970
DOMINGO B. TEOXON, petitioner-appellant, vs. MEMBERS OF THE BOARD OF ADMINISTRATORS, PHILIPPINE VETERANS ADMINISTRATION, respondents-appellees.

FACTS

Petitioner Domingo B. Teoxon, a veteran who suffered permanent physical disability from injuries sustained in line of duty as a member of a recognized guerrilla organization, filed a claim for disability pension under the Veterans’ Bill of Rights (Republic Act No. 65). He was initially awarded a monthly pension of P25.00, later increased to P50.00. Teoxon filed a suit for mandamus before the Court of First Instance of Manila, alleging that the pension amounts awarded were contrary to the statutory rates set by Republic Act No. 65, as amended by Republic Acts Nos. 1362 (1955) and 1920 (1957). He claimed entitlement to a pension effective May 10, 1955, at P50.00 monthly until June 21, 1957, and at P100.00 monthly plus P10.00 for each unmarried minor child below 18 from June 22, 1957, onward. The respondents, members of the Board of Administrators of the Philippine Veterans Administration, admitted the facts but defended their actions based on the rules and regulations they promulgated. The lower court dismissed the petition, upholding the Board’s authority to use its regulations as a guide and finding no reason to make an exception for Teoxon.

ISSUE

Whether the administrative rules and regulations promulgated by the Philippine Veterans Administration Board can prevail over the specific statutory provisions of the Veterans’ Bill of Rights (Republic Act No. 65, as amended) regarding the fixed amount of pension for permanently incapacitated veterans.

RULING

No. The Supreme Court reversed the lower court’s decision. The Court held that statutory provisions fixing the amount of pension take precedence over conflicting administrative rules and regulations. The Veterans’ Bill of Rights, as amended, specifically grants a life pension of P50.00 monthly (increased to P100.00 by Republic Act No. 1920) plus P10.00 monthly for each unmarried minor child below 18 to veterans permanently incapacitated from work due to service-connected injuries. Administrative rules must be in harmony with the law and cannot amend an act of Congress. Where a repugnancy exists between the statute and the implementing rules, the former prevails. The Court cited its ruling in Begosa v. Chairman, Philippine Veterans Administration, which categorically held that a veteran suffering from permanent disability cannot be denied what is specifically granted by legislative enactment. The affirmative defenses of non-exhaustion of administrative remedies and the suit being against the State were also rejected. The Court granted the petition for mandamus and ordered respondents to pay Teoxon the pension in accordance with the statutory rates.