[ G.R. No. 76353. September 29, 1989 ] 258 Phil. 757
EN BANC
[ G.R. No. 76353. September 29, 1989 ]
SOPHIA ALCUAZ, MA. CECILIA ALINDAYU, BERNADETTE ANG, IRNA ANONAS, MA. REMEDIOS BALTAZAR, CORAZON BUNDOC, JOHN CARMONA, ANNA SHEILA DINOSO, RAFAEL ENCARNACION, ANNALIZA EVIDENTE, FRANCIS FERNANDO, ZENNY GUDITO, EDGAR LIBERATO, JULIET LIPORADA, GABRIEL MONDRAGON, JOSE MARIA PACKING, DOMINIC PETILLA, MA. SHALINA PITOY, SEVERINO RAMOS, VICTOR SANTIAGO, CAROLINA SARMIENTO, FERDINAND TORRES, RICARDO VENTIGAN AND OTHER STUDENTS OF THE PHILIPPINE SCHOOL OF BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION (Q.C.) SIMILARLY SITUATED, PETITIONERS, VS. PHILIPPINE SCHOOL OF BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION, QUEZON CITY BRANCH (PSBA), DR. JUAN D. LIM, IN HIS CAPACITY AS PRESIDENT AND CHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF PSBA, ATTY. BENJAMIN P. PAULINO, IN HIS CAPACITY AS VICE-PRESIDENT FOR ADMISSION AND REGISTRATION, MR. RUBEN ESTRELLA, IN HIS CAPACITY AS OFFICER-IN-CHARGE, MR. RAMON AGAPAY, IN HIS CAPACITY AS DIRECTOR OF THE OFFICE OF STUDENT AFFAIRS AND MR. ROMEO RAFER, IN HIS CAPACITY AS CHIEF SECURITY OF PSBA, RESPONDENTS. R E S O L U T I O N
PARAS, J.:
On May 2, 1988, this Court through its Second Division rendered a Decision in the instant case which prodded the Intervenor Union (hereinafter referred to as the Union) to file a motion for reconsideration. Its argument hinges on the pronouncement that -
“x x x. Likewise, it is provided in the Manual, that the “written contracts” required for college teachers are for one semester. It is thus evident that after the close of the first semester, the PSBA-QC no longer ha any existing contract either with the students or with intervening teachers. Such being the case, the charge of denial of due process is untenable. It is time-honored principle that contracts are respected as the law between the contracting parties. x x x” (p. 12, Decision, underscoring supplied). (p. 874-875, Rollo)
with the allegedly inevitable consequence of extenuating the pernicious practice of management to arbitrarily and wantonly terminate teachers simply because their contracts of employment have already lapsed.
The motion likewise points out the fact that two of the faculty members, namely Mr. Asser (Bong) Tamayo, and Mr. Rene Encarnacion, supposedly found guilty by the Investigating Committee headed by Mr. Antonio M. Magtalas (p. 342, Rolo), had been issued permanent appointments (not mere temporary contracts) by no less than the President of the School himself. The appointment of Mr. Asser (Bong) Tamayo dated August 9, 1986 (p. 887, Rollo) can attest to this claim.
It is on the basis of the foregoing that We hereby amend Our previous statements on the matter.
In a recent Decision,[1] this Court had the opportunity to quite emphatically enunciate the precept that full-time teachers who have rendered three (3) years of satisfactory service shall be considered permanent (par. 75 of the Manual of Regulations for Private Schools). Thus, having attained a permanent status, they cannot be removed from office except for just cause and after due process.
Now applying the same principle in the case at bar, Mr. Asser (Bong) Tamayo having stayed in the Philippine School of Business Administration, Quezon City Branch (PSBA, for brevity) for three and one-half (3½) years (in a full-time capacity) may be deemed a permanent faculty member provided, of course, the services rendered have been satisfactory to the school. However, because the investigation showed that Mr. Tamayo had participated in the unlawful demonstration, his services cannot be deemed satisfactory.
In the case of Mr. Rene Encarnacion, and Mr. Severino Cortes, Jr. who taught in PSBA for two and one-half (2½) years and one and one-half (1½) years respectively, to them a permanent status cannot be accorded for failure to meet the minimum requirement of three (3) years set by the aforementioned Manual of Regulations. Of equal importance, at this point, is the fact that the letter of appointment had been extended only to Mr. Tamayo and not to Mr. Encarnacion, neither to Mr. Cortes, Jr.
WHEREFORE, for the reasons adverted to hereinabove, the motion for reconsideration, except insofar as We have made the aforementioned clarificatory statements about the tenure of full-time teachers and professors, is hereby DENIED.
In conclusion, We wish to reiterate that while We value the right of students to complete their education in the school or university of their choice, and while We fully respect their right to resort to rallies and demonstrations for the redress of their grievances and as a part of their freedom of speech and their right to assemble, still such rallies, demonstrations, and assemblies must always be conducted peacefully, and without resort to intimidation, coercion, or violence. Academic freedom in all its forms, demands the full display of discipline. To hold otherwise would be to subvert freedom into degenerate license.
SO ORDERED. Gancayco, Padilla, Bidin, Griño-Aquino, and Medialdea, JJ., concur. Fernan, C.J., Narvasa, and Feliciano, JJ., join in Mme. Justice Cortes’ concurring and dissenting opinion. Melencio-Herrera, J., except for the general statement that students’ enrollment is limited to per semester, I concur. Gutierrez, Jr., J., in the result. Cruz, J., see dissent. Sarmiento, J., I dissent. Please see dissenting opinion. Cortes, J., concurring and dissenting in a separate opinion. Regalado, J., no part. Did not participate in deliberations.