G.R. No. L-26849 September 30, 1970
CONTINENTAL MANUFACTURING EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION, EMMANUEL VEGA, POMPEYO ORTEGA, MANUEL PANGILINAN and FLORENTINO RAMIREZ, petitioners, vs. THE HONORABLE COURT OF INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS, CONTINENTAL MANUFACTURING CORPORATION, RUFINO DEEUNHONG as President and ELISEO C. QUIAZON, comptroller, respondents.

FACTS

Petitioners, the Continental Manufacturing Employees Association and its officials, filed an unfair labor practice complaint against the respondent company and its officers on March 25, 1963. After hearing, Associate Judge Amando C. Bugayong of the Court of Industrial Relations (CIR) rendered a decision on October 19, 1965, finding private respondents guilty of unfair labor practice. The decision ordered them to cease and desist from such acts, to reinstate petitioners Emmanuel Vega, Manuel Pangilinan, and Florentino Ramirez with back wages, and to pay back wages to petitioner Pompeyo Ortega until he found substantially equivalent employment on May 23, 1963. Private respondents received a copy of this decision on November 5, 1965. Instead of filing a motion for reconsideration within the five-day reglementary period, their counsel filed an urgent motion for extension on November 10, 1965, which was denied the same day by Judge Bugayong citing the court’s “no-extension policy.” A motion for reconsideration (dated November 10 but verified on November 12) was filed, and the supporting arguments were submitted only on November 19, 1965. Petitioners subsequently filed a motion for execution on February 1, 1966, claiming the decision had become final. On February 18, 1966, private respondents filed an unverified motion to admit their belated motion for reconsideration. Associate Judge Emiliano C. Tabigne granted this motion on March 18, 1966. The CIR en banc then issued a resolution on October 17, 1966, granting the motion for reconsideration and dismissing the unfair labor practice case. Petitioners challenge this resolution on procedural and substantive grounds.

ISSUE

Whether the respondent Court of Industrial Relations en banc acted correctly in granting the motion for reconsideration and setting aside the decision of its associate judge, despite said motion being filed out of time and the supporting arguments being submitted beyond the reglementary period, thereby causing the original decision to become final and executory.

RULING

No. The Supreme Court reversed and set aside the resolution of the CIR en banc dated October 17, 1966, and reinstated the decision of Associate Judge Amando C. Bugayong dated October 19, 1965. The Court held that the decision of Judge Bugayong had already become final and unappealable. Under the CIR Rules, a motion for reconsideration must be filed within five days from receipt of the decision, and supporting arguments must be submitted within ten days from the filing of the motion. Failure to observe these periods is sufficient cause for dismissal of the motion. Private respondents received the decision on November 5, 1965. Their motion for reconsideration was filed only on November 10 (or November 12, per verification), and the supporting arguments were submitted on November 19, 1965, which was beyond the ten-day period. The Court, citing Elizalde & Co., Inc. v. Court of Industrial Relations and other precedents, ruled that the belated filing rendered the original decision final. The subsequent grant of the motion to admit the late filing was improper. Given this procedural disposition, the Court found no need to inquire into the substantive issue regarding the sufficiency of evidence.