REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES (PHILIPPINE NATIONAL POLICE), PETITIONERS, VS. HON. AMER R. IBRAHIM, IN HIS CAPACITY AS PRESIDING JUDGE, BRANCH 9, REGIONAL TRIAL COURT (RTC) OF MARA…
PEREZ, J.:
In Our Minute Resolution dated 29 May 2014,[2] We directed petitioner to submit proof of service by publication of its Motion to Declare Respondent in Default within five (5) days from notice.
The petitioner, through the Office of the Solicitor General (OSG), filed a Motion for Extension twice praying for an extension of thirty (30) days on 20 June 2014[3] and another 30 days on 23 July 2014,[4] for a total of sixty (60) days extension, alleging that the OSG exerted its earnest efforts to contact the authorized representative of the PNP to find out if the latter complied with Our 24 January 2015 directive but the said representatives were uncooperative and could not give a definite answer on their query. It further manifested that after the expiration of the last 30 days extension and no action would still be taken by the PNP, it would like to submit the case to the sound discretion of this Court.
On 15 January 2015, the Judicial Records Division reported that no compliance has yet been filed by the OSG or the PNP.[5]
Indeed the present petition was once already dismissed by this Court on 9 November 2010 for failure of the petitioner to prosecute its action for an unreasonable length of time.[6] It was reinstated after a motion for reconsideration[7] was filed by the OSG praying for the reversal of the 9 November 2010 Resolution which was subsequently granted by this Court in Our Resolution dated 10 March 2011.[8]
Petitioner has come to this Court to ask for more time to prosecute the present petition once too many but still failed to comply with Our directives intended to expedite the resolution of this petition.
IN VIEW OF THE FOREGOING, We hereby DISMISS the instant petition pursuant to Section 3, Rule 17 of the Rules of Court for failure to prosecute and for failure to obey the Order of the Court to submit proof of service of Motion to Declare Private Respondent in Default despite repeated extensions of time.
SO ORDERED.
Camello, J., Chairperson, and Inting, JJ., concur.
[1] Rollo, pp 173-175.
[2] Rollo, p 183.
[3] Rollo, pp 184-186.
[4] Rollo, pp 188-191.
[5] Rollo, CMIS Verification Report attached at the front portion.
[6] Rollo, pp 87-88.
[7] Rollo, pp 95-102.
[8] Rollo, pp 105-106.