GR 46011; (May, 1938) (Digest)
G.R. No. 46011 ; May 31, 1938
EMILIO GALVEZ, petitioner, vs. ALFONSO SALVADOR and P. M. ENDENCIA, Judge of First Instance of Bulacan, respondents.
FACTS
Petitioner Emilio Galvez filed an election protest in the Court of First Instance of Bulacan, contesting the election results for municipal mayor and councilor of Bigaa, Bulacan. The protest alleged that Galvez and his co-protestant were candidates who received a specified number of votes, but the board of canvassers proclaimed the respondents as the winners. The respondent judge dismissed the protest on the ground that it failed to allege specifically that the protestants had “duly filed [their] certificate[s] of candidacy,” as required by Section 479 of the Election Law. Galvez petitioned for a writ of mandamus to compel the judge to take cognizance of the protest.
ISSUE
Whether the motion of election protest alleges sufficient jurisdictional facts, particularly by not expressly stating that the protestants had duly filed their certificates of candidacy, to confer jurisdiction upon the trial court.
RULING
No. The Supreme Court denied the petition. The Court held that an express allegation in the motion of protest that the protestant is a candidate who “has duly filed his certificate of candidacy” is a mandatory jurisdictional requirement under Section 479 of the Election Law. The failure to include this precise allegation deprives the Court of First Instance of jurisdiction over the election contest. The Court reaffirmed its prior rulings (e.g., Tengco v. Jocson) that such an allegation is indispensable, as it is a condition precedent imposed by statute for initiating a protest. The mere allegation that the protestant was a “candidate” who received votes is insufficient, as it does not satisfy the statutory language. The petition for mandamus was therefore dismissed.
AI Generated by Armztrong.