GR L 13433; (December, 1959) (Digest)
G.R. No. L-13433, December 29, 1959
FORTUNATO F. HALILI, petitioner, vs. JUAN V. ALDEA, respondent.
FACTS
Petitioner Fortunato F. Halili seeks a review of a decision by the Public Service Commission (PSC) granting respondent Juan V. Aldea a certificate of public convenience to operate four jeepneys on the Novaliches (Quezon City) to Blumentritt (Manila) route and vice-versa. The PSC’s decision was based on the testimony of the applicant-respondent and petitions from school teachers and residents of Novaliches, which asserted an acute inadequacy of transportation facilities due to a tremendous population increase from new enterprises and industrial establishments along the route. In opposition, the petitioner submitted reports from checkers stationed along the route, which indicated that his buses were not overcrowded.
ISSUE
Whether the Public Service Commission erred in finding the existing bus service inadequate and in granting the respondent a certificate of public convenience based on the evidence presented.
RULING
The Supreme Court affirmed the decision of the Public Service Commission. The Court held that the PSC’s finding of inadequate service was supported by a preponderance of evidence. It distinguished the checker reports submitted by the petitioner from those in prior cases (L.T.B. vs. M. Ruiz Highway Transit, Inc. and B. T. Co. vs. Reyes), noting that in this instance, the checkers merely observed passing buses without boarding them to make actual passenger counts, thus giving their reports the weight of mere observations. Furthermore, the Court took judicial notice of the contemporary population movement from crowded Manila districts to suburban subdivisions and the fact that jeepneys provide faster transportation for teachers, students, and employees during rush hours compared to slower buses that make frequent stops. The Court found no evident lack of evidence as required by law (Section 35 of the Public Service Act) to warrant a reversal of the PSC’s findings. Costs were awarded against the petitioner.