G.R. No. L-15347; April 29, 1961
General Bus Corporation and Halcon Bus Line, Inc., substituted by Mindoro Transportation Company, Inc., petitioners, vs. Gregorio Cunanan, respondent.

FACTS

On January 17, 1958, respondent Gregorio Cunanan applied with the Public Service Commission (PSC) to operate five units on the Pinamalayan-Bongabong line in Oriental Mindoro. He presented evidence that existing services by petitioners were inadequate, citing long passenger waits of one to two hours, frequent lack of accommodation, and occasional bus delays or cancellations due to engine trouble. He also demonstrated the area’s substantial population and his financial capacity.
Petitioners, existing operators on the line, opposed the application. They argued they were sufficiently servicing the route with 17 trucks on an hourly schedule, noting low passenger volume at certain points and the presence of other authorized operators. They contested Cunanan’s financial ability and submitted PSC agent reports and official records indicating 47 authorized daily round trips on the line with a 15-minute interval, suggesting adequate existing service.

ISSUE

Whether the Public Service Commission acted properly in granting respondent a certificate of public convenience to operate a TPU service on the Pinamalayan-Bongabong line based on the evidence presented.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the PSC’s decision, ruling that it acted properly. The Court emphasized the settled doctrine that factual findings of the PSC, when supported by substantial evidence, are conclusive and will not be disturbed on review. The petitioners’ challenge essentially questioned these factual determinations.
The Court found ample evidence supporting the PSC’s conclusion of public need. This included proof of passenger overcrowding and unreliability in the existing service. Notably, the PSC reconciled the evidence, observing that the petitioners’ own submitted PSC agent reports contradicted their claim of sufficient 15-minute intervals, instead indicating actual trip intervals of an hour or more. The reports further revealed that petitioners often failed to operate all their authorized units and maintain their schedules due to road conditions and river swelling, abandoning some trips. The PSC also reasonably noted that many of the other operators cited by petitioners served only adjacent municipalities, not the entire contested line. Therefore, the PSC’s factual finding that public convenience and necessity would be promoted by authorizing Cunanan to operate three units was sufficiently grounded in evidence and thus binding on review.