RADIO COMMUNICATIONS OF THE hometown a few months later;
PHILIPPINES (RCPI) v BOARD OF he suffered mental anguish and
COMMUNICATIONS and Diego Morales personal inconveniences.
GR L-43653
RCPI v Board of Communications and Pacifico Respondent Board held in both cases that
Innocencio the service rendered by RCPI was inadequate
GR L-45378 and unsatisfactory. A disciplinary fine of P200
29 November 1977 | Martin, J. |Quasi-judicial was imposed in each case, pursuant to Sec
fines and penalties 21 of CA 146, as amended.
ISSUE: W/N the Board of Communications
FACTS: can impose such liability NO
In GR L-43653, complainant-respondent
Diego Morales claims that while he was in Petitioner argues that respondent Board has
Manila, his daughter sent him a telegram no jurisdiction to entertain and take
from Isabela informing him of the death of cognizance of complaints for injury cause by
his wife. breach of contractual obligation arising from
The telegram, sent through negligence under Art 1170 and injury caused
RCPI, never reached him. by quasi-delict or tort liability under Art
He had to be informed 2176. The case should be ventilated in the
personally and had to take the proper courts of justice and not in the Board
trip by airplane. of Communications.
Because of RCPIs failure to
transmit the message, The Court had already ruled that the Public
respondent allegedly suffered Service Commission and its successor in
inconvenience and additional interest, the Board of Communications,
expenses and prays for being a creature of the legislature and
damages. not a court, can exercise only such
RCPI claims that the telegram sent by jurisdiction and powers as are expressly
respondent was transmitted from Isabela to or by necessary implication, conferred
its Message Center at Cubao but when it was upon it by statute.
relayed from Cubao, the radio signal became The Board of Communications
intermittent which made the copy received exercises the same powers,
at Sta. Cruz, Manila unreadable and jurisdiction and functions as that
unintelligible. provided for in the Public Service
Act for the Public Service
In GR L-45378, complainant-respondent Commission, one of which is to
Innocencio claims that Lourdes Innocencio issue certificate of public
sent a telegram from Tarlac to him at convenience.
Laguna, to inform him about the death of Power to issue certificate of public
their father. convenience does not carry with it
The telegram, sent through RCPI the power of supervision and
never reached him. control over matters not related to
Despite the non-receipt and/or the issuance of the certificate or in
non-delivery of the message, the performance in a manner
the sender has not been suitable to promote public interest.
notified about its non-delivery;
Pacifico was not able to attend Even assuming that the Board of
the internment of their father. Communications has the power or
Because of RCPIs failure to jurisdiction to insure adequate public service,
deliver the telegram, he was RCPI cannot be subjected to payment of
shocked when he visited his fine under Sec 21 of the Public Service
Act.
Sec 21 subjects to a fine every
public service that violates or fails The proper forum for complainant-
to comply with the terms and respondents to ventilate their grievances for
conditions of any certificate or any possible recovery of damages against RCPI
orders, decisions or regulations of should be in the courts.
the Commission.
In both cases at hand, RCPI is not In Francisco Santiago v RCPI and
being charged for violation of the Constancio Langan v RCPI, the Court
terms and conditions of its held that the Public Service
certificate of public convenience or Commission, now the Board of
of any order, decision or Communications, has no justification in
regulations of the Board of imposing fines. The only power the
Communications. Commisison possessed over radio
The complaints arose from alleged companies was to fix rates. It could not
breach of contractual obligation take to task a radio company for any
through negligence, which do not negligence or misfeasance. There is
necessarily involve RCPIs failure to nothing in Sec 21 of the Public Service
comply with its certificate. The Act which empowers the commission to
charge does not relate to the impose a fine.
management of the facilities and
system of transmission of Decision: Both decisions of the Board of
messages by petitioner in Communications are reversed, set aside, and
accordance with its certificate of declared null and void.
public convenience.
