GR 36893; (February, 1933) (Digest)
G.R. No. 36893 ; February 24, 1933
MANILA ELECTRIC COMPANY, petitioner-appellant, vs. PASAY TRANSPORTATION COMPANY, INC., respondent-appellee.
FACTS
The Public Service Commission (PSC) granted Pasay Transportation Company a certificate to operate an auto-truck service on a specific route in Manila in 1928. After a few days of partial operation, Pasay Transportation requested and was granted permission to suspend operations due to “ruinous competition” from Manila Electric Company (Meralco), with the condition that service must resume by January 31, 1929, or the certificate would be cancelled. Pasay Transportation did not resume service by that date and took no action until September 1931, when it notified the PSC of its intent to resume operations. It then requested a modification of its original route to one virtually duplicating Meralco’s existing line and a fare reduction. Without a hearing, the PSC granted these requests on September 22, 1931. Meralco moved for revocation of this approval and enforcement of the 1928 cancellation order, but its motion was denied, prompting this appeal.
ISSUE
Whether the Public Service Commission acted without jurisdiction or with grave abuse of discretion in granting Pasay Transportation Company’s requests to modify its certificate and resume operations without a hearing and without receiving evidence.
RULING
Yes. The Supreme Court set aside the PSC’s orders dated September 22, 1931. The PSC acted without a hearing and without receiving any evidence, contrary to established principles and its own prior sound policy against authorizing duplicate bus services on Manila’s crowded streets, which leads to improper competition. The Court noted that Pasay Transportation, after minimal initial operation, had flouted the PSC’s 1928 directive to resume service for almost three years, made no investment, and risked nothing. Its right had become, at most, a mere technical right. The PSC’s action effectively authorized a new line, not a mere resumption or modification. Since the orders lacked evidential support and were issued without a hearing, they must be vacated. Costs were awarded against Pasay Transportation.
AI Generated by Armztrong.