GR No.

L-25024, 30 March 1970

Teodoro Santiago vs Juanita Bautista

- Camille Anne D. Marquez

Fact:

Teodoro Santiago, Jr. was a graduating student at Sero Elementary School in

Cotabato City. Prior to the end of the school year, the said school constituted a
Committee on the Rating of Students for Honors composed of teachers of the said
school for the purpose of selecting the honor students of its graduating class. The
above-named committee deliberated and adjudged Teodoro C. Santiago, Jr. as the
third honor, the first and second place being obtained by his two other classmates,
Socoro Medina and Patricia Liñgat.

Three days before the date of graduation, the third place Teodoro Santiago, Jr.,
represented by his mother and with his father as counsel, sought the invalidation of
the ranking of honor student by instituting an action for certiorari, injunction and
damages in the Court of First Instance of Cotabato against the above-named
committee members along with the District Supervisor and the Academic Supervisor
of the place. The complaint alleges grave abuse of discretions and irregularities in the
selection of honor students in the said school such as the following:

a) the placing of Patricia Liñgat in the second place instead of him when in fact he
had been a consistent honor student and the former had never been his close
rival before except in Grade V wherein she ranked third;

b) the tutorial given by their teacher in English to the first honor during summer
vacation;

c) the illegal constitution of the said committee as the same was composed of all
the Grade VI teachers only, in violation of the Service Manual for Teachers of
the Bureau of Public Schools which provides that the committee to select the
honor students should be composed of all teachers in Grades V and VI;

d) the changing of the final ratings on their grading sheets;

e) that petitioner personally appealed the matter to the School Principal, to the
District Supervisor, and to the Academic Supervisor, but said officials passed
the buck to each other to delay his grievances, and as to appeal to higher
authorities will be too late, there is no other speedy and adequate remedy under
the circumstances.

Respondents moved for the dismissal of the case on the grounds (1) that the action
for certiorari was improper, and (2) that even assuming the propriety of the action, the
question brought before the court had already become academic. The motion to
dismiss was granted.
Issue:

Whether or not the action for certiorari filed by petitioner is proper.

Ruling:

No.

Certiorari is a special civil action instituted against any tribunal, board, or officer
exercising judicial functions (Section 1, Rule 67). A judicial function is an act performed
by virtue of judicial powers; the exercise of a judicial function is the doing of something
in the nature of the action of the court (34 C.J. 1182).

In order that a special civil action of certiorari may be invoked in this jurisdiction
the following circumstances must exist: (1) that there must be a specific controversy
involving rights of persons or property and said controversy is brought before a
tribunal, board or officer for hearing and determination of their respective rights and
obligations. It is evident that the so called committee on the rating of students for honor
whose actions are questioned in this case exercised neither judicial nor quasi-judicial
functions in the performance of its assigned task. Before tribunal, board or officer may
exercise judicial or quasi-judicial acts, it must be clothed with power and authority to
determine what the law is and thereupon adjudicate the respective rights of the
contending parties. In the instant case, there is nothing on record about any rule of
law which provides that when teachers sit down to assess the individual merits of their
pupils for purposes of rating them for honors, such function involves the determination
of what the law is and that they are therefore automatically vested with judicial or quasi-
judicial functions.