MANUEL REGALADO, ET AL., PETITIONERS, VS. THE PROVINCIAL CONSTABULARY COMMANDER OF NEGROS OCCIDENTAL, ET AL., RESPONDENTS.

Petitioners seek to enjoin respondents from preventing or
interfering with the entry of petitioners’ ice to the Municipality of
Cadiz, Negros Occidental, for the exclusive use of their deep-sea
fishing business undertaken outside of the territorial limits of said
municipality.

Petitioners are engaged in deep-sea fishing business who sell their
fish as far as the City of Manila, Philippines. Although their fishing
boats are fishing far beyond the territorial limits of Cadiz, Negros
Occidental, they dock their fishing boats in said municipality. The use
of ice in their fishing business is indispensable, and because they
send to their fishing boats in Cadiz the ice they buy from Bacolod City
where they can buy it at cheaper price than what they can buy in the
Municipality of Cadiz, the Public Service Commission, thru the
Provincial Constabulary Commander of Negros Occidental, acting thru his
soldiers and agents, decided to prevent the entry and passage of said
ice to said municipality under the pretense that the same is in
violation of its Revised Order No. 1. Hence they presented the present
petition for injunction.

Respondents, answering the petition, set up the following special defenses: (a)
that respondent Provincial Commander has acted under orders of
respondent Public Service Commission pursuant to the power vested in it
by Commonwealth Act No. 146, as amended, known as the Public Service
Act, to supervise and regulate the operation of public utilities in
such manner as to protect and promote the convenience of the public; (b)
that the jurisdiction, supervision and control of respondent Commission
over the operation of public utilities extend not only to the acts of
public utility operators but also to certain acts of users or consumers
such as petitioners whose acts of buying large quantities of ice in
Bacolod and using them in Cadiz have the effect of violating Section
156 of its Revised Order No. 1 of which petitioners have actual
knowledge, as well as of the opinion rendered by said Commission
interpreting the pertinent provision of said order; and (c)
that respondents’ acts, having been done in the valid exercise of the
Commission’s police power, do not constitute an unlawful limitation of
petitioners’ right as to warrant the restriction of the performance of
said acts.

The pertinent portion of the opinion of respondent Commission dated
July 25, 1958 which clarifies the pertinent provision of Section 156 of
its Revised Order No. 1 which provides that “No ice produced by any
operator shall be sold directly or indirectly outside of its authorized
territory”, says:

“Our opinion therefore, is that Section 156 of
Revised Order No. 1 of the Public Service Commission prohibits an ice
plant operator from selling his ice even within the limits of his
authorized territory to any person if he knows that that persons will
use or resell that ice outside of the operator’s authorized territory,
and that an operator’s ice must be sold only to the public of his
authorized territory so as to avoid unlawful competition and safeguard
the interests and convenience of said public.”

In connection with the above directive, the issues now posed by
petitioners are: Has respondent Public Service Commission any legal
authority to prevent the entry or passage to the Municipality of Cadiz
of the ice bought by petitioners in Bacolod City when the ice is not
for resale or distribution in Cadiz but for the exclusive use of their
deep-sea fishing business? Can respondent Public Service Commission, in
order to favor a particular ice plant operator, compel petitioners to
buy ice from this particular operator although they can buy ice
elsewhere at a cheaper price? Has respondent Public Service Commission
authority to prohibit petitioners as consumers from buying ice wherever
they please?

The purpose of Section 156 of Revised Order No. 1 of respondent
Commission, as clarified in its opinion of July 25, 1958, which
prohibits an ice plant operator from selling his ice even within the
limits of his authorized territory to any person if he knows
that that person will use or resell that ice outside of the operator’s
authorized territory, is dual in character: first, to prevent unlawful
competition between ice operators, and second, to make certain that the
full production of a given plant is always available for the use of the
public which that operator is obliged to serve (See opinion). In this
sense, we hold that the issuance of said Revised Order No. 1 is valid,
it being an exercise of the supervision and control the Commission has
over all public services conferred upon it by Section 13 of Act 146.
But, do petitioners come within the purview of said Order No. 1? Or
stated in another way, is there any evidence to show that the Negros
Ice & Cold Storage Company, or the Bacolod Ice & Cold Storage
Company, from whom petitioners bought the ice for use of their fishing
business, sold their ice with knowledge that it will be used or sold
outside of their authorized territory? Is there any evidence showing
that petitioners bought the ice to be sold within the territory of
another operator?

The record shows none. On the contrary, it is an admitted fact that
petitioners bought the ice in question for the exclusive use of their
fishing business which was then undertaken in the high seas—not within
the territorial jurisdiction of any ice operator—even if incidentally
it has to pass or go through the Municipality of Cadiz because their
fishing boats are docked there. And, then, we know that respondent
Commission has only jurisdiction over persons engaged in
public utilities, or over a public utility which holds a certificate of
public convenience, and not over persons who are not engaged in public
utilities, except perhaps those who may violate any valid regulation it
may promulgate under the law. (Iloilo Ice & Cold Storage Company vs. Public Utility Board, 44 Phil., 551, 554; Iloilo Commercial & Ice Company vs.
Public Service Commission, 56 Phil., 28, 29.) And even then, these
persons, to be dealt with, need be given their day in court. They
cannot be dealt with without due process of law.

It is, therefore, evident that petitioners do not come within the
purview of Revised Order No. 1. And even if they do, they were not
given their day in court, for the Commission has taken action against
them without giving them an opportunity to explain their purpose of
buying ice from an ice plant operator of Bacolod City. The order,
therefore, given by the Commission to prevent the passage of
petitioners’ ice to the Municipality of Cadiz is arbitrary and as such
has no valid force against petitioners.

Wherefore, petition is granted. Respondents are hereby enjoined from
enforcing the Commission’s order contained in Annex A of the petition,
or from interfering with the entry of petitioners’ ice to the
Municipality of Cadiz, Negros Occidental, for the use of their fishing
business outside of the territorial limits of said municipality. No
costs.

Paras, C. J., Bengzon, Padilla, Montemayor, Labrador, Concepcion, Barrera, and Gutierrez David, JJ., concur.