CA denies opposition’s TRO petition
2025 DAGUPAN BUDGET IS VALID
THE Court of Appeals (CA) denied the petition for a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) against Dagupan’s P1.6-billion budget for 2025 filed by the city’s seven opposition councilors.
The Special Civil Action for Certiorari and Prohibition with Urgent Prayer for TRO, Writ of Preliminary Injunction and/or other Injunctive Remedies was filed by Councilors Librada Fe Reyna, Maria Lourdes Fernandez, Alvin Coquia, Redford Erfe-Mejia, Victoria Czarinna Lim-Acosta, Alipio Serafin Fernandez, and Celia Lim.
The respondents were Mayor Belen Fernandez, Vice Mayor Bryan Kua, Councilors Michael Fernandez, Jeslito Seen, Dennis Canto, Marcelino Fernandez and Bradley Benavides, and Sangguniang Panlungsod Secretary Ryan Ravanzo.
In denying the petition, CA Third Division Justices Apollinario Bruselas Jr., Ruben Reynaldo Roxas, and Jaime Fortunato Caringal wrote in their resolution dated February 28, 2025: “The prayer for Temporary Restraining Order is DENIED at the time there being no prima facie showing of a great and irreparable injury that will befall the applicants should the ancillary relief prayed for be not given.”
The petitioners said the respondents “committed grave abuse of discretion amounting to excess of jurisdiction when they conducted sessions in November and December last year and passed the ordinance approving the annual budget, among other ordinances and resolutions, despite lacking the required number of affirmative votes in passing the annual budget ordinance.”
At that time, three of the seven majority councilors were on a 60-day preventive suspension imposed by the Office of the President.
Records show there were 173 resolutions and ordinances passed by the minority as the new majority in sanggunian in just 60 days, dwarfing the 42 resolutions and ordinances passed by the seven majority councilors in more than two years.
The petitioners sought the declaration of all acts and omissions of the respondents during the assailed session and subsequent sessions as null and void ab initio because of their assumption that these stemmed from an erroneous interpretation of the Local Government Code, existing jurisprudence, and the sanggunian Internal Rules of Procedure. (Leonardo Micua)
Share your Comments or Reactions
Powered by Facebook Comments
