556 Phil. 170
CARPIO MORALES, J.:
x x x xThe trial court having denied[12] petitioners' Motion for Reconsideration,[13] the petitioners filed the present Petition for Review on Certiorari, manifesting early on that they are raising only questions of law. They fault the trial court[14]
[Respondent] is entitled to be informed and have a copy of the decision rendered by the Sangguniang Bayan of Juban, Sorsogon pursuant to Section 66 of R.A. 7160, for him to seek the remedies afforded by law, if he so desires. x x x [He] received Executive Order No. 8 and attached thereto is Sangguniang Bayan Resolution No. 12-2005, on the same day, March 8, 2005. It appears that the . . . Sangguniang Bayan furnished [him] with a copy of the said resolution not to afford him his remedies on appeal in violation of Section 66 7160, but to execute said resolution hastily . . . in utmost disregard of [his] constitutional right to due process. Pursuant to Section 67 of R.A. 7160, [he] has thirty (30) days from receipt of the said resolution to file an appeal. [He] was not afforded the opportunity to elevate Resolution No. 12-2005 on appeal.
x x x x
Considering the foregoing findings . . . the municipal mayor gravely abused her discretion, amounting to lack of jurisdiction in issuing and executing Executive Order No. 8 . . .
x x x x[10] (Underscoring supplied)
The trial court thus disposed:
Wherefore, premises considered, this court grants the petition for certiorari and orders the following:With costs against the respondents Sangguniang Bayan Members and Municipal Mayor.
- The annulment and setting aside of Executive Order No. 8 dated March 8, 2005 issued by the Municipal Mayor;
- The reinstatement of . . . Ramon H. Lacsa to his position as Punong Barangay of Bacolod, Juban, Sorsogon;
- The payment to the said petitioner of the emoluments/allowances accruing to him from the time of removal from office up to the time of reinstatement thereat;
- Directing the Sangguniang Bayan of Juban, Sorsogon to serve anew the petitioner with a copy of the Decision/Resolution No. 12-2005 and from receipt of which the petitioner shall enjoy his right to appeal such decision to the Sangguniang Panlalawigan pursuant to Section [6]7 of R.A. 7160.
SO ORDERED.[11]
Sec. 61(c) - A complaint against any elective barangay official shall be filed before the sangguniang panlungsod or Sangguniang Bayan concerned whose decision shall be final and executory." (Emphasis and underscoring supplied)The "final and executory" phrase used in the immediately-quoted provision was construed in Mendoza v. Laxina, Sr.[16] to be "immediately executory," albeit the respondent may appeal the adverse decision to the proper office. Thus this Court declared:
Sections 61 and 67 of the Local Government Code, provide:The conditions that would afford respondent to file a petition for certiorari under Rule 65 of the Rules of Court as he did file one before the RTC - that a tribunal, board, or officer exercising judicial or quasi-judicial functions has acted without or in excess of its or his jurisdiction, or with grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction, and there is no appeal, or any plain, speedy, and adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law - are not here present.Section 61. Form and Filing of Administrative Complaints. A verified complaint against any erring local elective official shall be prepared as follows:In interpreting the foregoing provisions, the trial court did not consider Section 68 of the same code which provides:
x x x x
(c) A complaint against any elective barangay official shall be filed before the sangguniang panlungsod or sangguniang bayan concerned whose decision shall be final and executory, (Italics supplied)
Sec. 67. Administrative Appeals. - Decisions in administrative cases may, within thirty (30) days from receipt thereof, be appealed to the following:
x x x x
(b) the Office of the President, in the case of decisions of the sangguniang panlalawigan and the sangguniang panlungsod of highly urbanized cities and independent component cities.
Decisions of the Office of the President shall be final and executory.An appeal shall not prevent a decision from being final and executory. The respondent shall be considered as having been placed under preventive suspension during the pendency of an appeal in the event that he wins such appeal. In the event that the appeal results in exoneration, he shall be paid his salary and other such emoluments during the pendency of the appeal.Obviously, the said Code does not preclude the taking of an appeal. On the contrary, it specifically allows a party to appeal to the Office of the President. The [phrase] "final and executory" x x x in Sections 67 and 68, respectively, of the Local Government Code, are not, as erroneously ruled by the trial court, indicative of the appropriate mode of relief from the decision of the Sanggunian concerned. These phrases simply mean that the administrative appeals will not prevent the enforcement of the decisions. The decision is immediately executory but the respondent may nevertheless appeal the adverse decision to the Office of the President or to the Sangguniang Panlalawigan, as the case may be.[17] (Emphasis and underscoring supplied)