G.R. No. L-22176; April 30, 1965
RODOLFO CARREON, ALFREDO ABAD, NICOLAS CARREON and SEDRONIO CALALANG, petitioners, vs. GERMANICO CARREON, HERMINIO ACAYLAR, JUSTINO SALDON and BENJAMIN CARDINO, respondents.

FACTS

Petitioners Rodolfo Carreon (Municipal Mayor) and his co-petitioners (Municipal Councilors) were elected in the 1959 general elections and assumed office on January 1, 1960, for terms until December 31, 1963. Republic Act No. 3811 , creating the City of Dapitan, was approved on June 22, 1963. On September 5, 1963, petitioners filed their certificates of candidacy for the newly created positions of City Mayor and City Councilors of Dapitan. The Secretary of Justice opined that petitioners, by filing for other offices, were considered resigned from their municipal offices as of September 5, 1963, under Section 27 of the Election Code. Based on this, the President issued Proclamation No. 179, set November 8, 1963, for the city’s formal organization, and appointed respondents as provisional city officials. In the November 12, 1963 elections, respondents Germanico Carreon, Herminio Acaylar, and Justino Saldon were elected and proclaimed on November 27, 1963, for terms starting January 1, 1964. Petitioners initiated this quo warranto proceeding on December 3, 1963, seeking to oust respondents from their provisional appointments and be declared entitled to the city offices themselves.

ISSUE

Whether petitioners, upon filing their certificates of candidacy for city offices on September 5, 1963, were considered resigned from their positions under Section 27 of the Election Code, which applies to an official running for an office “other than the one which he is actually holding.” This hinges on determining what positions petitioners were holding on that date: were they municipal officials or city officials?

RULING

The Supreme Court granted the writ of quo warranto. Petitioners were already City Mayor and City Councilors of Dapitan on September 5, 1963, and thus were not considered resigned when they filed their candidacies for the same positions. Section 86 of Republic Act No. 3811 (Dapitan City Charter) provided that the city government “shall be organized upon the approval of this Act” (June 22, 1963) and that the incumbent municipal officials “shall continue in office until the expiration of their present terms.” The Court held that upon the charter’s approval, the City of Dapitan came into existence as a body corporate, and the municipality of Dapitan ceased to exist. The two governments, having identical territory and functions, could not coexist. Consequently, the petitioners, as the incumbent municipal officials, automatically became the city officials of Dapitan City upon the charter’s approval to enable the city government to function. Therefore, when they filed their certificates of candidacy, they were already city officials running for the identical offices they held, making Section 27 of the Election Code inapplicable. The Court distinguished the case from Mejia vs. Bololong, as the Dagupan City Charter therein expressly provided for organization on a future date fixed by the President. Respondents were declared not entitled to hold office prior to January 1, 1964, and petitioners were declared entitled to the corresponding salaries withheld under the preliminary injunction.