G.R. No. 76592. January 13, 1989.
ERDULFO C. BOISER, doing business under the name and style of PREMIERE AUTOMATIC TELEPHONE NETWORK, petitioner, vs. NATIONAL TELECOMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION, DIRECTOR DANILO SY, JOSE ROSALES & JOHN DOES, respondents.

FACTS

Petitioner Erdulfo Boiser operates a telephone system in Bohol. In 1965, he entered into an Interconnecting Agreement with Philippine Long Distance Telephone Company (PLDT). Under this agreement, PLDT undertook to obtain the necessary government permits, including a radio station license (License No. 9779) for the interconnection from the National Telecommunications Commission (NTC). This license eventually expired. In 1979, PLDT disconnected the circuit, prompting Boiser to file a civil case, which reached the Supreme Court (G.R. No. 61438). The Court ruled in favor of Boiser and permanently restrained PLDT from disconnecting the service.
Subsequently, the NTC instituted Administrative Case No. 82-123 against PLDT for operating a radio station with an expired license and using an unauthorized frequency. Boiser moved to intervene in this administrative case, but the NTC denied his motion. This denial was upheld by the Court of Appeals and later by the Supreme Court in G.R. No. 67110, which dismissed Boiser’s petition for review. The NTC then proceeded to render its decision on August 29, 1986, finding PLDT liable, imposing a fine, and ordering the confiscation of the radio equipment used in the violation.

ISSUE

Whether the NTC committed grave abuse of discretion in rendering its August 29, 1986 decision against PLDT and in ordering the confiscation of equipment, thereby violating Boiser’s right to due process.

RULING

The Supreme Court dismissed the petition. The core issue was whether Boiser had a cause of action or a legal right to assail the NTC decision. The Court ruled he did not. His claim of a legal interest was negated by established facts from prior proceedings (G.R. No. 67110), which showed he had no valid franchise or certificate of public convenience and necessity to legally operate his telephone system. His municipal franchise was withdrawn, his application before the Public Service Commission was dismissed, and his provisional authority had expired. Consequently, his operation for over seventeen years was illegal.
The Court held that Boiser, operating illegally, had no standing to intervene in the case against PLDT or to seek the nullification of the NTC order. His alleged interest was not legally protected. Furthermore, there was no denial of due process as he had already fully ventilated his claims in the prior proceedings before the appellate court and the Supreme Court. Regarding the NTC decision itself, the Court found no grave abuse of discretion. PLDT admitted to operating with an expired license and using a banned frequency. It was therefore incumbent upon the NTC, under the law, to hold PLDT liable and order the confiscation of the equipment used in the violation. The petition was without merit.