Cordero v. Public Service Commission
REITERATIONFacts
The Antecedents: Petitioners, holders of a certificate of public convenience to operate an ice-plant and sell ice in Bauan and Mabini, Batangas, appealed a decision of the respondent Public Service Commission (PSC) authorizing private respondents to sell ice and supply cold storage for Batangas province and Lipa City. Procedural History: The PSC granted the application of private respondents. The Petition: Petitioners assailed the validity of the PSC decision, contending it was null and void due to the lack of requisite notice of hearing and the delegation of the hearing to an official not belonging to the PSC's legal or chief division.
Issue(s)
Whether the decision of the Public Service Commission is null and void due to lack of requisite notice of hearing. Whether the hearing was improperly delegated.
Ruling
The decision appealed from is REVERSED and SET ASIDE. Private respondents shall pay the costs.
Ratio Decidendi
On the issue of lack of notice of hearing: The Court reiterated the principle established in Olongapo Jeepney Operators Association vs. Public Service Commission (13 SCRA 303). In that case, the publication of the notice of hearing in two newspapers of general circulation was deemed insufficient because the PSC's own order required, in addition to publication, individual notice to affected operators whose names appeared on a list attached to the order. The Court held that this requirement was conjunctive, not alternative. The failure to provide individual notices deprived the oppositors of their day in court, rendering the decision null and void. In the present case, the petitioners argued that the notice of hearing failed to be served individually by registered mail or personal delivery on "all affected parties" as indicated in the notice itself. While respondents contended that publication in two newspapers was sufficient and that no such list was attached, the Court found the principle from the cited case controlling. The inadequate notification to interested parties, which prevented their presence during the hearing, was a violation of due process. On the issue of improper delegation of hearing: The Court considered this issue unnecessary to discuss, given its resolution of the first issue.
Main Doctrine
The requirement of individual notice to all affected parties, in addition to publication, for applications for a certificate of public convenience is mandatory and conjunctive. Failure to comply with this requirement deprives oppositors of their day in court, rendering the decision null and void.