G.R. No.

L-53766 October 30, 1981 (108 SCRA 728) Where language is plain, subtle refinements which tinge words so as to give them
MARIA C. RAMOS, petitioner, the colour of a particular judicial theory are not only unnecessary but decidedly
vs. harmful. That which has caused so much confusion in the law, which has made it
COURT OF APPEALS, Judge JESUS R. DE VEGA of the Court of First Instance so difficult for the public to understand and know what the law is with respect to a
of Bulacan Malolos Branch II and the MUNICIPALITY OF HAGONOY given matter, is inconsiderable measure the unwarranted interference by judicial
Bulacan, respondents. tribunals with the English languages found in statutes and contracts, cutting out
words here and inserting them there, making them fit personal Ideas of what the
AQUINO, J.: legislature ought to have done or what parties should have agreed upon, giving
them meanings which they do not ordinarily have, cutting, trimming, fitting,
FACTS changing and colouring until lawyers themselves are unable to advise their clients
The Municipality of Hagonoy, Bulacan, availed of the services of the law firm of as to the meaning of a given statute or contract until it has been submitted to
Cruz Durian &Academia (now Cruz Durian Agabin Atienza & Alday) in a case for some court for its 'interpretation and construction
land recovery against MariaC. Ramos et al .There are two specific laws prohibiting private counsels representing the
• government- Sec. 1683 of the Revised Administrative Code states
Provincial Fiscal of Bulacan and Municipal Attorney of Hagonoy entered their "The provincial fiscal shall represent the province and any municipality or
appearance as supervising counsel in the case for land recovery municipal district thereof in any court, except in cases whereof original jurisdiction
• is vested in the Supreme Court or in cases where the municipality or municipal
Ramos moved to disqualify Cruz law firm from serving as counsel for district in question is a party adverse to the provincial government or to some
the municipality other municipality or municipal district in the same province. When the interests
• of a provincial government and of any political division thereof are opposed, the
Trial court denied motion to disqualify since it found that private counsel only provincial fiscal shall act on behalf of the province. When the provincial fiscal is
wanted to serve his native town disqualified to serve any municipality or other political subdivision of a province, a
• special attorney may be employed by its council.”
Ramos assailed said order by a petition for certiorari with the Court of Appeals, Another is Sec. 3 of Local Autonomy Act, Republic Act No. 2264, which provides
who sustained the ruling of the trial court, thus the case is appealed to the that the municipal attorney, as the head of the legal division or office of a
Supreme Court municipality,
"shall act as legal counsel of the municipality and perform such duties and
ISSUE exercise such powers as may be assigned to him by the council"
WON the finding of the CA that it is legal for a private counsel to represent LGU
is correct

RULING
Overturned. As Justice Moreland observes,