G.R. No. L-50054 August 17, 1988
Eternal Gardens Memorial Park Corporation, petitioner, vs. The Honorable Court of Appeals and Residents of Baesa, Caloocan City, respondents.

FACTS

Petitioner Eternal Gardens applied with the National Pollution Control Commission (NPCC) for a certificate of clearance to operate a memorial park. Private respondents, residents of Baesa, opposed the application. The NPCC granted the clearance subject to conditions on April 18, 1978, received by respondents on April 20. On May 4, respondents filed a motion for reconsideration, which the NPCC denied on August 22, 1978, while imposing a fine on petitioner for an earlier unauthorized interment. Respondents received this denial on August 25. They filed a notice of appeal with the appellate court on September 8, 1978, but paid the docket fee only on October 2.
Petitioner moved to dismiss the appeal as filed out of time. The appellate court initially expunged this motion due to lack of a notice of hearing. Petitioner sought certiorari from the Supreme Court. While that petition was pending, the appellate court, motu proprio, recalled its expungement order and later granted the motion to dismiss, finding the appeal untimely. Petitioner then moved to withdraw its Supreme Court petition as moot.

ISSUE

Whether the Court of Appeals committed grave abuse of discretion in its procedural handling of the case and, ultimately, whether the respondents’ appeal from the NPCC order was perfected on time.

RULING

The Supreme Court granted the petition, annulled the assailed appellate court orders, and declared the NPCC order final. The core legal logic rests on the jurisdictional requirement of perfecting an appeal within the reglementary period. The 15-day period to appeal from the April 18, 1978 NPCC order began on April 20. The motion for reconsideration filed on May 4 interrupted this period. Upon denial of the motion on August 22 (received August 25), respondents had only the remainder of the original period to appeal. Since only one day remained, the appeal deadline was August 26, 1978. The notice of appeal filed on September 8 was late.
Furthermore, perfection of an appeal requires not just filing a notice but also payment of the docket fee within the period. Even if the period were deemed to start anew on August 25, the payment on October 2 was still beyond 15 days. The Court emphasized that payment of docket fees is an indispensable and jurisdictional step. Since the appeal was not perfected on time, the appellate court never acquired jurisdiction over it, rendering all its subsequent orders null and void. The Supreme Court found no equitable grounds to relax this mandatory rule.