G.R. No. L-44740. January 20, 1977.
DOJOSE, DOMEL TRADING and DOMINGO JOSE, petitioners, vs. HON. SECRETARY OF LABOR, THE NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION and INOCENCIO BARRIENTOS, respondents.

FACTS

The Court of Industrial Relations (CIR), in a 1971 decision, found petitioners Domingo Jose and his controlled corporations, Dojose and Domel Trading, guilty of unfair labor practice for dismissing Inocencio Barrientos due to his union activities. The CIR ordered Barrientos’s reinstatement with back wages from May 1964. Petitioners did not appeal this decision to the Supreme Court. Instead, years later, they filed a motion to reopen the case in the CIR, which was denied. After the Labor Code’s effectivity, the case was transferred to the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC), which affirmed the CIR judgment in 1975. Petitioners appealed to the Secretary of Labor, who affirmed the NLRC but modified the award by deducting Barrientos’s interim earnings from his back wages.
Petitioners then filed this petition for certiorari and prohibition before the Supreme Court in October 1976. They sought to annul the 1971 CIR decision, arguing lack of jurisdiction, denial of due process, lack of substantial evidence, absence of an employer-employee relationship, and the non-existence of the corporate petitioners at the time of dismissal. Respondents countered that the CIR decision was long final and executory and that petitioners failed to exhaust administrative remedies by not appealing to the President.

ISSUE

Whether the petitioners have a cause of action for certiorari and prohibition to annul or modify the 1971 CIR decision at this late stage.

RULING

The Supreme Court dismissed the petition, holding it patently devoid of merit. The legal logic is clear: the petition constitutes a belated collateral attack on a final judgment. Petitioners failed to seasonably appeal the CIR’s 1971 decision to the Supreme Court, which was the proper remedy to raise their substantive claims, including the alleged lack of substantial evidence. By resorting instead to successive dilatory motions before the CIR and later administrative appeals, they allowed the judgment to attain finality. A final judgment has the force of res judicata and cannot be disturbed. The Court found no jurisdictional defect, as the CIR, NLRC, and Secretary of Labor all acted within their statutory authority. The claim of lack of employer-employee relationship was a factual issue conclusively settled by the CIR, whose findings, supported by evidence, noted Barrientos was employed in Jose’s business, which later became the incorporated entities. The proper procedural recourse was a timely appeal, not certiorari. The Court thus affirmed the Secretary of Labor’s modified order.