BCI EMPLOYEES AND WORKERS UNION (PAFLU), PETITIONER, VS. HON. PIO MARCOS, JUDGE OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE, BAGUIO CITY AND BENGUET CONSOLIDATED, INC., RESPONDENTS.

This is a petition for certiorari to annul the pro­ceedings had
before the Honorable Pio Marcos, Presiding Judge of
the Court of First Instance of Baguio City, in its
Civil Case No. 1150.

It appears that prior to
August 18, 1962 the col­lective bargaining agent of the rank and file workers
of respondent Benguet Consolidated, Inc. was the Benguet­-Bulatoc Workers Union, with which respondent
company en­tered into a bargaining contract
that was to expire on December 24,
1963, containing the following provisions, among others, regarding union privileges:

“XIV.  UNION
PRIVILEGES

x x x                                           x x x

1.   In accordance with the pro­vision of
sub-section XII-C of the Collective Bargaining Agreement of May 23, 1955, and
during the effectivity of this Agreement, or any
extension thereof and as long as the UNION remains the certified exclusive
representative of all the employees and workers in the bargaining units of Acupan, Balatoc and Antamok, the COMPANY will continue to collect UNION
compensation from each employee or worker, in the COMPANY’S employ in the
bargaining units of Acupan, Balatoc
and Antamok, who has paid UNION compensation im­mediately
prior to the effectivity of this Agreement (with the
exception of those speci­fied in the immediately preceding paragraph) in an
amount equal to twenty-five centavos (0.25) per week for each week in which
said employee or work­er has worked at least one eight (8) hour shift, such
compensation being in payment of services rendered by the UNION as certified
exclusive representative of the employees and workers in the above mentioned
bargaining units for collective bargaining purposes;

x x x                                           x x x

4.   As of the date of the execution of this
Agreement and as long as the UNION continues to be the sole collective
bargaining re­presentative of all the employees and workers in the COMPANY’S em­ploy
in Acupan, Balatoc and Antamok and of such other bargain­ing unit or units within
the COMPANY’S mining and other direct­ly associated operations in the
Sub-Province of Benguet, Mountain Province, wherein
the UNION may hereafter be certified, the COM­PANY agrees to continue to
collect the weekly compensation provided for in items (1), (2) and (3) hereof;
provided however, that should the UNION, for any reason whatsoever, cease to be
the cer­tified collective bargaining representative
of the em­ployees and workers in any or all of the above named bar­gaining units, the
COMPANY’S obligation herein to collect the weekly compensation in said unit or
units, shall automatically cease; x x x“

Subsequently, after a certification election had been held in
Case No. 761-MC wherein the petitioner Union, the Benguet-Balatoc
Workers Union and five other labor unions participated, the Court of Industrial
Relations issued an order dated August 18, 1962 certifying “the herein
peti­tioner Union* as the sole and exclusive
bargaining agent of the non-supervisory employees and workers in the em­ploy of
the respondent company in its Acupan, Antamok and Batatoc mines.”

On September 15, 1962 the Bobok Lumber
Jack Asso­ciation, one of the unions which participated in the cer­tification
election (Case No. 761-MC), filed with the re­spondent court a complaint for
“Declaratory Relief with Preliminary Injunction”, docketed as Civil
Case No. 1150, praying that judgment be rendered declaring that Benguet Consolidated, Inc. and herein petitioner Union,
named defendants there, “cannot enter into an agreement con­tinuing the
modified union shop in the aforementioned collective bargaining
(contract)”, and that a writ of preliminary injunction be issued to
restrain the company from making deductions of union dues from the wages of its
employees and workers in Acupan, Antamok
and Balatoc and turning over such deductions to the
defendant union.  On the same date,
respondent court issued the writ of preliminary injunction prayed for in the
complaint.  In a supplemental order dated September 18, 1962 “newly hired employees or laborers or
those who will be hired later on by the defendant company” were exempted
from the operation of the aforesaid writ.

On September 24 and 25, 1962 respondent company and herein petitioner Union, respectively, filed motions to lift
the preliminary injunction.  At the
hearing thereof the parties, through their respective counsel, mutually agreed
that the company resume deducting union
dues from all employees, the same to be held in trust for dispo­sition as the court might later on direct in its reso­lution on the motions to
lift, concerning which the parties would submit their arguments in
writing.  Pursuant to said agreement
respondent court issued an order dated September
28, 1962, the dispositive portion of
which reads:

“WHEREFORE, finding the agreement of the parties made in open
court in order, the Court approves the same and hereby orders that, effective
be­ginning the work week of September 23, 1962, the Company resume making
deductions of union compensation from all employees heretofore pay­ing to the Benguet Balatoc Workers Union as
well as from newly hired employees, but to hold the same in trust to be
disposed of in the man­ner that this Court may direct in its resolution on the
motions to lift the preliminary injunction.”

On November 2, 1962
herein petitioner Union moved to dismiss the complaint
filed in Civil Case No. 1150 on three (3) grounds, namely:  (1) that the cause of action was barred by prior judgment; (2) that the
complaint stated no cause of action; and (3) that the plaintiff had no legal
capacity to sue.

Pending resolution of the motions to lift the preli­minary
injunction and the motion to dismiss the complaint, herein petitioner filed the
instant petition for certiorari.

The prayers in the petition are for this Court:  (a) to declare that respondent court had no
jurisdiction to take cognizance of the action for declaratory relief filed by
the Bobok Lumber Jack Association (Civil Case No.
1150) and to issue a writ of preliminary injunction therein; and (b) to issue a
writ of mandatory injunction requiring re­spondent company to deliver to
petitioner the union dues which it has deducted from the wages of its employees
and which are held in trust pursuant to the order of respond­ent court dated
September 28, 1962.

With leave of this Court the Bobok
Lumber Jack Asso­ciation, plaintiff below, came in as intervenor
and filed its answer in intervention, denying most of the allega­tions in the
petition.

It is clear that the instant petition was prematurely filed and
hence must be dismissed for that reason. 
The is­sue of respondent court’s jurisdiction in the declaratory relief
case was raised in the motion to dismiss filed by herein petitioner with said
court; and the issue concern­ing the validity of the writ of preliminary
injunction with respect to the deduction of union dues was likewise raised in
the two motions to lift the same.  All
three motions had not yet been resolved by respondent court when the instant
petition was filed, contrary to the settled rule that certiorari against
an inferior court is not pro­per when the remedies sought are still available
in said court, so much so that even after it has acted a motion for
reconsideration must, as a general rule, be filed in order to afford it an
opportunity to rectify its error.

Furthermore, the questions raised in the petition involve many
facts alleged therein and denied in the an­swers of the respondents – facts
which require presentation of evidence not supplied by the pleadings or by
their annexes now before us.

WHEREFORE, the petition is dismissed, with costs against
petitioner.

Concepcion, C.J., Reyes, J.B.L., Dizon, Zaldivar, Fernando, Teehankee, Barredo, Villamor, and Makasiar, JJ., concur.

Ruiz Castro, J., took no part.

* BCI Employees and Workers Union
(PAFLU)