Galarosa v. Valencia | G.R No. 109455 | November 11, 1993 | Davide, Jr., J.

Nature: PETITION for certiorari to set aside a decision of the Regional Trial Court of Sorsogon, Br. 52,
Valencia, J.
Petitioners: Raul Galarosa (in his capacity as the incumbent President and Representative of the Association of
Barangay Captains of the Municipality of Sorsogon, Sorsogon)
Respondents: Hon. Eudarlio Valencia (RTC Judge); Sangguniang Bayan of Sorsogon; Rodolfo Lasay
TOPIC: Leagues of LGU
SUMMARY: Petitioner Galarosa was elected as Brgy Captain with a term from Mar 1989 to May 1994. He was
appointed as president of the Katipunang Bayan or the Association of Brgy Councils. Because of this position, he was
seated as an ex-officio member of the Sangguniang Bayan of the Municipality of Sorsogon. The term of office of the
SB ended in June 1992. Respondent Lisay sought the election of a new president in the Katipunan (he was aspiring for
the position) and to enjoin Galarosa’s participation in the SB, alleging that his term of office as President of the
Katipunan is coterminous with the term of office of the SB members. Respondent Judge ruled in favor of Lisay. But the
SC REVERSED and held that Galarosa remains the president of the Katipunan and a member of the SB. The SC explained
the difference between the Katipunan under BP 337, and the Liga under the LGC which repealed BP 337. The provisions
of the LGC referring to the Liga cannot be applied to the Katipunan, as the LGC provisions cannot be given retroactive
effect. The SC applied the hold over-doctrine and ruled that Galarosa can sit as President and ex-officio member until
his successor is duly elected in the 1994 elections. The purpose of the Liga and the Katipunan was representation of
the barangays in the Sanggunian. The purpose of the doctrine is to prevent a hiatus in the government from occurring
pending the election of a successor. This way, the barangays will not have no representation in the Sanggunian.

FACTS
 March 28, 1989: Barangay elections where Petitioner Raul Galarosa was elected.
o He was appointed as the president of the Katipunang Bayan or the Association of Barangay Councils
(ABC) of the municipality of Sorsogon, by virtue of:
 BP 337 which provided for the creation of Katipunans; and
 EO 342 which delegated the President’s power to appoint Katipunan heads to the Secretary
of the DILG.
o Because of his position, he serves as an ex-officio member of the Sangguniang Bayan of Sorsogon.
o His term of office as Punong Barangay will end on May 31, 1994.
 During the incumbency of Galarosa, the LGC was passed, repealing BP 337 and EO 342. [LGC effective on Jan
1, 1992]
o Section 494 of LGC: The duly elected presidents of the liga ng mga barangay shall serve as ex-officio
members of the sanggunian. They shall serve as such only during their term of office as presidents of
the liga chapters, which in no case shall be beyond the term of office of the sanggunian concerned.
 The term of the members of the SB ended on June 30, 1992.
 Respondent Rodolfo Lasay sought to enjoin the SB of Sorsogon from recognizing Galarosa’s participation in
their session, alleging that his term as President ended with the end of the previous SB.
o As an incumbent barangay captain of Brgy Gimolito in the municipality of Sorsogon, he calls for a new
election, as he aspires to be President of the Katipunan.
o He did not implead Galarosa in this complaint.
 Respondent SB of Sorsogon sought for the dismissal of the complaint, alleging that Lasay has no legal right to
file the petition because his cause of action is based on speculative rights.
 Galarosa sought to intervene as an indispensable party, but Respondent Judge Valencia never resolved his
petition.
 Judge issued the assailed order declaring that Galarosa’s term as the Katipunan’s president has ended with
the expiration of the term of the previous SB on June 30, 1992, and therefore, he can no longer sit as an ex-
officio member of the current Respondent SB.
ISSUE: WON Galarosa can continue holding office as President of the Katipunan despite the expiration of the term
of the previous SB on June 30, 1992? – YES
 The Liga ng mga Barangay as provided for in the LGC is not exactly the same as its forerunner, the Katipunan
ng mga Barangay under BP 337. The LGC didn’t explicitly provide that the Katipunan automatically became
the Liga.
o The president of the Katipunan was appointed by the President of the PH or the DILG Secretary. While
the president of the Liga is elected.
o The term of office of the president in the Liga is coterminous with the SB. The term of office in the
Katipunan is set by their by-laws. The by-laws of the Katipunan provides that the term of office of all
officers shall be from the date of their elections until the next general barangay elections.
 Sec 491 of LGC was couched in future tense (“an organization of all barangays to be known as the Liga”) 
Shows that the Liga can only be deemed to exist upon the effectivity of the LGC.
o Sec 494 speaks of “duly elected presidents of the Liga”
o These provisions show that the Legislature never intended the term of office provided for in the LGC
to apply to presidents of the Katipunan, since the Katipunan existed prior to the LGC and its president
was appointed.
o In fact, there was no indication at all that these 2 sections can be given retroactive effect to adversely
affect the presidents of the Katipunan. They should be applied prospectively.
 On the contrary, the LGC expressly recognizes and grants hold-over authority to Katipunan presidents.
o Art 220 of its IRR provides that incumbent presidents shall continue to serve as ex-officio members of
the Sanggunian until the expiration of their term of office, unless sooner revoked for cause. And that
pending election of the presidents, the incumbent presidents shall continue to act as presidents of the
Liga.
 Purpose of the Liga and the Katipunan was representation of the barangays in the Sanggunian, thus the
Hold-Over Doctrine must be upheld, especially since nothing has expressly or impliedly prohibited it.
o The purpose of the doctrine is to prevent a hiatus in the government from occurring pending the
election of a successor. This way, the barangays will not have no representation in the Sanggunian.
 Executive construction must be given weight, therefore the interpretation of the LGC as explained in its IRR,
and the pertinent guidelines issued by the DILG must be respected.

Other issues:

 Lasay has personality to file: he has no capacity as a barangay captain seeking the presidency, since his right
is a mere expectancy. But, he has a right as a taxpayer since the issue involves Galarosa’s membership in the
SB, which involves salaries and therefore taxpayers’ money.
 Requisites for an action for declaratory relief were present:
o That there is a justiciable controversy
o That the controversy is between persons whose interests are adverse
o That the party seeking; the relief has a legal interest in the controversy, and
o That the issue invoked is ripe for judicial determination.
 Galarosa is an indispensable party, as he is the one who would be directly affected by the decision. No final
determination of the action can be had unless Galarosa is joined. Lasay should have been required to implead
Galarosa, otherwise, the case would be dismissed.
 Respondent Judge committed grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack of jurisdiction when he rendered
the challenged decision with undue and precipitate haste without resolving Galarosa’s motion to intervene.
 The proper recourse would be to remand this case to the RTC. However, the principal issue is purely legal and
the pleadings of the parties have exhaustively discussed the main issue and all collateral matters, the
controversy could be forthwith resolved on the basis thereof. The remand of the case to the trial court would
only delay the final disposition of the case and would not serve the public interest.
DISPOSITION: WHEREFORE, judgment is hereby rendered REVERSING and SETTING ASIDE the Decision of the
respondent Judge in Civil Case No. 5575 of Branch 52 of the Regional Trial Court of Sorsogon, Sorsogon. Costs against
private respondent Rodolfo Lasay.

NOTES: