View full case

PERCIVAL A. CENDAÑA v. CIRILO A. AVILA

FACTS:

Respondent Cirilo A. Avila was appointed as Director II of the Land Transportation Office (LTO) in 2003. While in office, Avila was granted a Certificate of Career Service Executive Eligibility by the Civil Service Commission. Petitioner Percival A. Cendaña was subsequently appointed to the same position in 2005 by President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo. Cendaña took his oath of office and assumed the duties of Director II at the LTO. The LTO directed Avila to turn over his post to Cendaña and issued a memorandum announcing the new appointment. Dissatisfied, Avila filed a petition for quo warranto with the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Quezon City, seeking a writ of preliminary injunction. The RTC granted the injunction, ordering Cendaña to cease assuming the functions of the Director II position. Cendaña then filed a petition for certiorari in the Court of Appeals to reverse the RTC's decision but was dismissed due to procedural flaws. Cendaña then appealed to the Supreme Court, arguing that the Court of Appeals erred in dismissing his petition based on technicalities rather than ruling on its merits.

ISSUES:

  1. Whether the Court of Appeals committed an error of law in dismissing the petition for certiorari on the grounds that petitioner did not state the "actual" addresses of the parties, did not manifest willingness to post bond, and did not file a motion for reconsideration before filing the petition for certiorari.

  2. Whether the Court of Appeals committed an error of law in dismissing the petition for certiorari in complete disregard of the rule that cases should be determined on the merits, not on technicalities.

RULING:

  1. The petition for certiorari is denied due course and dismissed.

PRINCIPLES:

  • The petition for certiorari should state the "actual" addresses of the parties, and failure to do so may be a ground for dismissal.

  • The petitioner must manifest willingness to post bond in the prayer for a temporary restraining order and/or a writ of preliminary injunction.

  • The petitioner must file a motion for reconsideration before filing a petition for certiorari under Rule 65 of the Rules of Court.

  • Cases should be determined on the merits and not on technicalities, but procedural requirements must still be complied with.