TERESITA C. LAI, PETITIONER, V. HON. LEANDRO M. JOSE, SHERIFF JACOBO C. ABRIL, JOANN G. MINAS AND EVANGELINE CONGE, RESPONDENTS.

Before Us is petitioner’s “MANIFESTATION AND MOTION TO DISMISS”^[1] (“Motion to Dismiss” for brevity), praying that the Petition for Mandamus^[2] at bench be dismissed or withdrawn.^[3] Petitioner stated, among others, the following:

“1. That in a separate case also involving the petitioner and private respondent Joann G. Minas before the Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources (BFAR Adm. Case No. 11-080), they have decided to enter into a Compromise Agreement in order to settle amicably their differences, which include this present case.

2. That under the said Compromise Agreement, the petitioner agreed to pay, and the private respondents likewise agreed to receive, the sum of P250,000 as a complete settlement of petitioner’s obligations to the private respondents. As a consequence thereof, the private respondents have already executed a Certificate of Redemption, which is what the petitioner is praying for in this petition for mandamus. A copy of the Certificate of Redemption is hereto attached xxx.

xxx

3. That in view of the said developments, it is humbly submitted that the issues in this case have been rendered moot and academic, thus no longer requiring the resolution by this Honorable Court. Thus, petitioner respectfully moves for the dismissal/withdrawal of her present petition.

xxx

WHEREFORE, premises considered, petitioner most respectfully prays that this petition be ORDERED DISMISSED OR WITHDRAWN.”^[4] (Emphasis supplied)

For their part, private respondents Joann G. Minas and Evangeline Conge (“private respondents” for brevity), thru counsel,^[5] filed a “COMPLIANCE/MANIFESTATION”^[6], which stated that, among others:

“Private respondents JOANN G. MINAS and EVANGELINE CONGE, through their undersigned counsel, unto this Honorable Court respectfully manifest that they interpose no objection to the withdrawal/dismissal of the instant case in view of the fact that the same has been rendered moot and academic due to the execution of the Compromise Agreement among the parties.“^[7] (Emphasis supplied)

Given that petitioner sought the dismissal of the very Petition she filed, and which dismissal was not objected to by private respondents, then petitioner’s prayer in her Motion to Dismiss^[8] for the dismissal of her Petition for Mandamus^[9] is justified.

WHEREFORE, petitioner’s “MANIFESTATION AND MOTION TO DISMISS”^[10] is GRANTED. The Petition at bench is DISMISSED, and, the case is deemed CLOSED and TERMINATED.

SO ORDERED.

Dicdican (Chairman) and Paredes, JJ., concur.

---

^[1] Rollo, pp. 43-45.

^[2] Rollo. pp. 3-15.

^[3] Rollo, p. 44.

^[4] Rollo, pp. 43-44.

^[5] Rollo, p. 51. February 23, 2012.

^[6] Rollo, p. 51

^[7] Rollo, p. 51.

^[8] Rollo, pp. 43-45

^[9] Rollo. pp. 3-15

^[10] Rollo, pp. 43-45.