Judge Isidro Arenas v. City of San Carlos, Pangasinan
Facts:
-
-
Isidro G. Arenas is an incumbent City Judge of the City of San Carlos Pangasinan, a
third-class city.
In light of the enactment of R.A. no. 5967, petitioner made repeated requests to the
respondent city to increase his salary and to compensate his back pay/salary or salary
differential of P9,500.00 covering the period from effectivity of said law, June 21,
1969, to the filing of his petition for mandamus before the CFI of San Carlos City,
Pangasinan, which was January 21, 1971.
Respondent city refuses to act on petitioner’s request and fervently asserts that they
are not obligated to institute petitioner’s prayer or demands.
The CFI (Branch 10), dismissed the petition.
Issue:
-
Whether or not Judge Arenas is entitled to a salary increase. From P12,000.00 per
annum, to P18,000.00 per annum.
Interpretations of Parties
Petitioner:
- The petitioner asserts that the general phrase that fixes the city judge's salary from
then on, to P18,000.00 per year, should be construed as the controlling phrase of said
provision. Otherwise, it would render such clause/statement/phrase useless or
ineffectual.
Respondent/s:
- Respondent city stands firm in adhering to the last/latest proviso of the said provision
in fixing the salary of the City Judge to be at least P100.00 per month less than that of
the salary for the City Mayor. Additionally, the city argues it is in no financial
capacity to institute such salary increases.
Ruling:
- The Court ruled to DISMISS the petition, stating that the irreconcilable repugnancy
between the general phrase and the qualifier or proviso can be resolved by construing
that the proviso takes precedence over the general statement. Adding that the proviso
is the latest expression of the legislator’s intent. This was further reinforced by
consulting the legislative deliberations for said statute.
PRINCIPLES/RULES/TOOLS/CANONS
EMPLOYED
OF
STATUTORY
CONSTRUCTION
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Law construed as a whole.
Use of legislative deliberations.
Determination of legislative intent.
Construction to render provisions effective.
Provisos employed to limit the general language of a statute.