GR 43634; (August, 1937) (Digest)
G.R. No. 43634; August 24, 1937
FRANCISCO JAVIER and ROMAN OZAETA, plaintiffs-appellants, vs. TOMAS EARNSHAW, Mayor of the City of Manila, defendant-appellee.
FACTS
Plaintiffs, owners of a parcel of land in Manila, contracted with Asiatic Petroleum Co. (P.I.) Ltd. to install a gasoline pump and underground tank on their property for the exclusive use of their taxicab company. The company applied for and was granted a permit by the Mayor of Manila, subject to conditions including non-transferability and revocability upon 30 days’ notice. After obtaining the permit, plaintiffs began selling gasoline to the public, violating the exclusive-use condition. Following complaints and an investigation where plaintiffs admitted the sales, the Mayor notified them of the permit’s cancellation. Plaintiffs then filed an action for injunction to restrain the cancellation, challenging the validity of Manila Ordinance No. 1985, which regulated the installation of gasoline stations.
ISSUE
1. Whether Ordinance No. 1985 of the City of Manila is constitutional and valid.
2. Whether the Mayor validly cancelled the permit for violation of its conditions.
RULING
1. Yes, Ordinance No. 1985 is constitutional and valid. The ordinance, which prohibits the installation of gasoline stations within 500 meters of an existing station, was enacted under the police power of the City of Manila as authorized by the Revised Administrative Code. Its purpose is to regulate the business of storing and selling gasoline to ensure public safety, not to prohibit it entirely. The regulation is a reasonable exercise of police power to minimize fire hazards and does not constitute an unreasonable restraint of trade or deprivation of property rights.
2. Yes, the Mayor validly cancelled the permit. The permit was expressly revocable, and plaintiffs violated the condition limiting gasoline use to their taxicab fleet by selling to the public. The Mayor acted within his authority in cancelling the permit after due notice and investigation. The Court affirmed the dismissal of the complaint and lifted the preliminary injunction.
AI Generated by Armztrong.