G.R. No. L-68729 Case Digest

G.R. No. L-68729 May 29, 1987

Radio Communications of the Philippines, Inc., petitioner

vs National Telecommunications Commission and Kayumanggi Radio Network

Ponente: Gutierrez, Jr.

Facts:

Petitioner seeks the reversal of the decision of NTC which ordered Radio Comm to desist from operating its radio telephone services in Catarman, Samar and Sorsogon.

December 14, 1983 Kayumanggi filed a complaint with NTC alleging that Radio Comm was operating in Catarman without certificate of public convenience and necessity. Radio Comm counter-alleged that its telephone services in the areas are covered by the legislative franchise recognized by NTC and its predecessor Public Service Commission.

After conducting hearing, NTC ordered Radio Comm to immediately cease from operating in thise areas. Stating that EO 546 a certificate of public convenience and necessity is mandatory for the operation of communication utilities and services including radio communications.

Radio Comm then filed a motion for reconsideration which was denied. Hence, the present petition.

Issue: Whether or not Radio Comm a grantee of legislative franchise to operate a radio company is required to secure a certificate of public convenience and necessity before it can operate.

Ruling: Petition has no merit.

PD No. 1 reorganizing the executive branch of the National Government, Public Service Commission was abolished and its functions were transferred to 3 regulatory boards. The functions transferred were still subject to limitations provided in the Public Service Law as amended.

The new provision states that the exemption enjoyed by radio companies no longer exists because of the changes. And the argument of the petitioner that the franchise has been operating for a long time already cannot be sustained.

In view of the foregoing, we find no reason to disturb the public respondent's findings of fact, and conclusions of law insofar as the private respondent was authorized to operate in Catarman, Samar and San Jose, Mindoro. As a rule, the Commission's findings of fact, if supported by substantial evidence, are conclusive upon this Court. We may modify or ignore them only when it clearly appears that there is no evidence to support reasonably such a conclusion. (Halili v. Daplas, 14 SCRA 14). The petitioner has not shown why the private respondent should be denied the authority to operate its services in Samar and Mindoro. It has not overcome the presumption that when the public respondent disturbed the petitioner's monopoly in certain areas, it was doing so pursuant to public interest and the common good.