G.R. No. L-24989 July 21, 1967
Pedro Gravador, petitioner-appellee, vs. Eutiquio Mamigo, The District Supervisor of Bayawan-Sta. Catalina School District, The Division Superintendent of Schools of Negros Oriental, The Director of Public Schools and The Secretary of Education, (all sued in their official and personal capacities), respondents-appellants.

FACTS

Pedro Gravador was the principal of the Sta. Catalina Elementary School. On August 15, 1964, the Superintendent of Schools advised him of his separation from service, effective immediately, on the ground that he had reached the compulsory retirement age of 65. The school official based this on pre-war records (Insular Teachers Cards and an Employee’s Record Card) indicating Gravador’s birth date as November 26, 1897. A few days later, Eutiquio Mamigo was designated teacher-in-charge. Gravador protested, claiming his true birth date was December 11, 1901, as shown in post-war records (Elementary Teacher’s Report Card, Employee’s Record Card, and Employee’s Record of Qualifications) which he personally accomplished. He supported his claim with an affidavit from two individuals who declared they were present at his birth and baptism, and a verified pleading from a 1924 cadastral case filed by his deceased brother, Romulo Gravador, stating Pedro was then 23 years old. The church baptismal records were destroyed by fire and the municipal civil register contained no record of his birth. After waiting eight months for administrative action on his protest, and with the one-year period to file a quo warranto suit running out, Gravador filed a suit for quo warranto, mandamus, and damages in the Court of First Instance of Negros Oriental on April 13, 1965. The trial court ruled in his favor, finding his birth date to be December 11, 1901, and ordered his reinstatement. The respondents appealed directly to the Supreme Court. During the pendency of the appeal, Gravador retired on December 11, 1966, and received retirement benefits, but the Supreme Court deemed it necessary to resolve the merits as the computation of retirement annuities depended on the correct birth date and years of service.

ISSUE

Whether the trial court erred in relying on the post-war records to establish that Pedro Gravador was born on December 11, 1901, and not on November 26, 1897 as indicated in the pre-war records.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the trial court’s judgment. The lower court correctly relied on the post-war records for three cogent reasons. First, a person may testify as to his age as learned from family tradition, and Gravador consistently declared his birth date as December 11, 1901 in his post-war records, back pay application, and requests for correction to the GSIS and Civil Service Commission. Second, the verified 1924 cadastral pleading by his deceased brother, stating Gravador was then 23 years old, constituted a declaration regarding pedigree made ante litem motam, admissible under the Rules of Court. Third, it was agreed Gravador had an older brother, Constantino, born on June 10, 1898, who retired in 1963; therefore, Pedro could not have been born in 1897. The Court also ruled that Gravador’s action was not prematurely filed, as the eight-month wait for administrative action was sufficient, and further delay would have risked nullifying his claim by exceeding the one-year period for filing a quo warranto suit.