G.R. No. 8979. March 22, 1916

This was a petition for the writ of certiorari, presented in the Court of First Instance of the Province of Pampanga, on the 29th of October, 1912.  To the petition the defendants duly  answered.

After hearing the respective parties, the Honorable Julio Llorente,  judge, rendered the following decision upon  the questions  presented:

“Section 217 of Act No.. 190 provides as follows:

” ‘When the ground of the complaint in an  action  in a Court of First Instance is that an inferior tribunal, board, or officer exercising judicial  functions, has  exceeded  the jurisdiction of such tribunal, board,  or officer, and there is no appeal, nor  any plain, speedy, and adequate remedy, and the court, on trial, finds the  allegations of the complaint to be true, it shall render a judgment ordering such inferior tribunal,  board, or officer, or  other person having the custody  of the record or proceedings, at a specified time  and place, to certify to the court a transcript of the record  and the proceedings  *   *   *   that the same may be reviewed by the court; etc.’

“According to the law,  it is therefore necessary, in order that a writ of certiorari may issue, that the inferior court, board, or officer have exceeded his jurisdiction.  The provincial board of Pampanga, in annulling  the resolution passed by the municipal council of San Fernando, mentioned in the complaint, did not exceed its jurisdiction.  Section 5 of Act  No. 1791 confers power upon the provincial board to approve all acts, ordinances, resolutions and orders which are within the  powers conferred upon the council or the municipal president, and to declare null and void such as are not within said powers.  Whether the provincial board of Pampanga  erred or not in annulling the resolution  of the municipal  council of San  Fernando, by ordering a new auction sale, such  error, if  committed,  can be  corrected by an appeal,  but does not  warrant the issuance  of a writ of certiorari.

“The writ of certiorari  prayed  for, is  denied.   So ordered.”

From that decision the defendants appealed to this court. The only question presented by the appellant is one relating to the jurisdiction  of the provincial board in annulling a resolution of the municipal council.

Without discussing in detail,  at this  time, the question presented, we are of the opinion and so hold that the conclusions reached by the lower court are in conformity with the law.  Its judgment is therefore hereby affirmed,  with costs.   So ordered.

Arellano,  C. J., Torres, and Araullo, JJ., concur.
Trent, J., dissents.