JUAN ANDAN AND ASUNCION CRUZ-ANDAN, PETITIONER’S AND APPELLANTS, VS. THE SECRETARY OF LABOR, JTTLIANO ESTEELLA, EUGENIC AGUIREE, FERNANDO NAVARRO, ET AL., RESPONDENTS AND APPELL…

This is an appeal from a judgment of the Court of First Instance of
Bulaean, the Hon. Ambrosio T. Dollete, presiding, dismissing a’
petition for prohibtion and certiorari’ filed by petitioners against
the respondents-appellees.

On September 18, 1954, respondents-appellees Eugonio Aguirre,
Fernando Navarre, Eufemio Itufalde, Aurelio de la Cruz, Eladio Fortez,
Menandro de Guzman and Ismael Cruz filed thru the provincial fiscal two
(2) separate informations against Asuncion Cruz and Juan Andan, the
herein petitioners-appellants, docketed as Criminal Cases Nos. 2099 and
2100 of the Court of First Instance of Bulaean, for violation of the
Minimum Wage Law arid of the Eight Hour Labor Law.

After a joint trial the court on September 12, 1958 rendeied
judgment finding Asuncion Cruz guilty in both cases and sentencing her
to pay a fine of P250.00 in each case, Juan Andan was acquitted in both
cases.

On November 10, 1958, respondents-appellees filed a complaint for
unpaid wages against petitioners-appellants with Regional Office No. 3
of the Department of Labor A motion to dismiss was filed on the ground
of res judicata and for lack of jurisdiction to try or hear the
complaint. This motion was denied by the Hearing Officer. On January
12, 1959, petitioners-appellants filed a motion for reconsideration of
the order denying then motion to dismiss. The Hearing Officer denied
the motion for reconsideration. After trial a decision dated February
17, 1959 was rendered sentencing the petitioners herein to pay the
respondents the sum of 118,904.00 for overtime and unpaid wages and
the sum of P1,890.00 as attorney’s fees. On April 6, 1B59,
petitioners-appellants filed a petition for extension of time to appeal
with the office of the Labor Standards, Bureau of Labor, which petition
was denied in an” order issued by the respondent Hearing Officer, dated
April 6,1959  and who at the same time issred ah order directing the
issuance of writ of execution.

On April 24, 1959, petitioners filed the petition for Certiorari and
Prohibition with Preliminary Injunction in tho Court of First Instance
of Bulacan. In an order dated June 5, 1959, the said court directed the
issuance of a writ of preliminary injunction enjoining the respondents
from carrying out the decision of Regional Office No. 3 of the
Department of Labor. The writ was. issued on August 8, 1950. On January
16, 1961, the lower court rendered the decision dismissing the action.
So, it also dissolved the writ of preliminary injunction.

In this appeal appellants contend that the lower court erred in:

1. Holding that the defense of res jwdieata cannot be availed
   of in the proceedings had before Regional Office No. 3 of the
   Department of Labor; and
2. Holding that said Regional
   Office No. 3 had jurisdiction to hear and try the complaints filed by
   the respondents-appellees before it.

On the question of jurisdiction of the Regional Office No. 3 of the
Department of Labor, the Court: finds and declares that said Regional
Office has no jurisdiction to hear and try the complaint filed before
it by the appellees. In the cases of Corominas, Jr., et al. vs. Labor
Standards Commission, et al., G.R. No. L-l4887, Manila Central
University vs. Calupitan, et al., ;G.R. No. L-15483; Wong Chun vs:
Carlim, et al., G.R. No. L-13940 and Balrodgan Co.,’ Ltd. vs. Fuentes,
et al., G.R No. L-15015, jointly decided by the Supreme Court on June
30; 1961, it was held that the provision of Reorganization Plan No.
20-A, particularly Sec. 25 thereof, granting regional offices of the
Department of Labor original and exclusive jurisdiction to consider
money claims including overtime pay, is not authorized, by the
provisions of Republic Act 997 which creates and grants-power to the
Reorganization Commission For this reason regional. offices have been
declared in a long line of decisions without jurisdiction to onsider
money c’aims filed by laborers. ‘ The second assignment of error is
therefore sustained.

As regional offices of the Department of Labor have no jurisdiction
to consider claims of the respondents-appellees, it is unnecessary for
Us to pass upon the first ground cf appeal.

Wrefore the decision appealed from is hereby reversed, the
decisions, rendered by Regional Office, No. 3 sre hereby set aside and
all proceedings therein in relation to the claims against petitioners
as well as the orders issued by said Regional Office No. 3 are hereby
declared null and void. With costs against respondents-appellees.

Bengzon, C. J., Padilla, Bautista Angelo, Concepcion, Reyes, J. B. L., Barrera, Paredes, Dizon and Makalintal, JJ., concur.