GR L 24334; (September, 1969) (Digest)
G.R. No. L-24334 September 30, 1969
CONCEPCION CORNELIO, petitioner, vs. HON. COURT OF APPEALS and SOCORRO T. MAGBANUA, respondents.
FACTS
Petitioner Concepcion Cornelio and respondent Socorro T. Magbanua were both former stallholders in the Bacolod City Central Market before it was destroyed by fire on April 14, 1955. After the market’s reconstruction, the City Council enacted ordinances for stall allocation. Magbanua applied for stalls in the grocery and sari-sari section, while Cornelio applied for stalls in the dry goods section. On August 11, 1958, the Market Committee awarded Stalls Nos. 236, 237, and 238 to Magbanua. Cornelio protested this award. The Secretary of Finance later declared the August 1958 awards void because the Market Committee was not duly constituted, lacking a representative from the market vendors. Subsequently, on August 9, 1960, a properly constituted Market Committee made a new award, granting Stalls Nos. 236, 237, and half of 238 to Cornelio, and half of Stall No. 238 and Stalls Nos. 239 and 240 to Magbanua. The Secretary of Finance affirmed this second award. Magbanua filed a civil case to enforce the first award, while Cornelio filed a mandamus case to compel delivery based on the second award. The Court of First Instance ruled in favor of Cornelio, but the Court of Appeals reversed this decision, declaring Magbanua entitled to the stalls.
ISSUE
Whether the Secretary of Finance acted with grave abuse of discretion or in excess of jurisdiction in affirming the second award of the Market Committee which granted Stalls Nos. 236, 237, and half of 238 to Concepcion Cornelio.
RULING
The Supreme Court reversed the decision of the Court of Appeals and affirmed the decision of the Court of First Instance. The Court held that the Secretary of Finance did not commit grave abuse of discretion or act in excess of jurisdiction. The first award was correctly declared void due to the improperly constituted Market Committee. The second award was made by a duly constituted committee after an ocular inspection to determine the stalls nearest to the parties’ former locations. The Secretary’s affirmance of this award, based on the committee’s factual finding intended to do justice to Cornelio who was not considered in the first award due to a technicality, was a valid exercise of his supervisory authority under the law. The Court found no arbitrariness or capriciousness in his action. Costs were imposed on respondent Magbanua.