MANILA YELLOW TAXICAB CO. ET AL., PETITIONERS AND APPELLANTS, VS. PANFILO SABELLANO, RESPONDENT AND APPELLEE.

HULL, J.:

Panfilo Sabellano applied to the Public Service
Commission for a certificate of public convenience authorizing him to
operate midget taxicabs in the City of Manila and its suburbs. The
existing operators opposed the granting of the certificate.

After hearing the Public Service Commission granted
the certificate authorizing the operation of ten midget taxicabs, and
from that action of the Public Service Commission the oppositors bring
this appeal.

During the hearing it was demonstrated beyond any
doubt that Sabellano is a mere figure head, and that he himself is
entirely lacking in experience or financial responsibility. The
granting of a certificate of public convenience to operate a fleet of
taxicabs is a privilege, not ‘a right. For the protection of the
traveling public, the real party in interest should be disclosed and
the applicant should have such standing both personally and financially
as to be able to respond to his obligations to the public. There is no
evidence in this case to show that applicant has those qualifications.

The order of the Public Service Commission granting
to appellee the certificate of public convenience to operate the fleet
of ten midget taxicabs is set aside and vacated. Costs against
appellee. So ordered.

Street, Villa-Real, Abad Santos, and Imperial, JJ., concur.

CONCURRING

GODDARD, J.,

I concur on the ground set forth in this decision
and on those stated in my dissenting opinion in the companion cases, G.
R. Nos. 40317 and 40319—E. Vesnan, applicant.

DISSENTING

MALCOLM and BUTTE, JJ.,

We dissent for the reasons stated in our separate
opinion attached to the case of Esmeralda Vesnan, petitioner and
appellant, vs. Manila Yellow Taxicab Co., Inc., et al., respondents and
appellees, G. R. No. 40319.