[ G. R. No. 34538. December 05, 1931 ]
[ G. R. No. 34538. December 05, 1931 ]
G. R. No. 34538
[ G. R. No. 34538. December 05, 1931 ]
MATIAS A. FERNANDO, PETITIONER AND APPELLANT, VS. GUZCO TRANSIT, RESPONDENT AND APPELLEE.
D E C I S I O N
MALCOLM, J.:
Before the Public Service Commission, the Guzco Transit Company asked for authority to increase the hours of service on the Norzagaray-Manila line, but was only partially successful since the commissioner conceded to the applicant the only disposable hours, which were 12:00 noon from Norzagaray and 5:30 P. M., from Manila. The two errors assigned on appeal on behalf of Matias A. Fernando, the oppositor, attack the justice of the above-mentioned concession to the Guzco Transit Company. However, no time need be consumed in consideration of the appeal, for the reason that there is evidence in the record reasonably supporting the findings of the commissioner, and for the further very obvious reason that details of administration such as the granting of permission for additional service to operators naturally lie within the discretionary powers of the Public Service Commission. The petition for review is totally without merit.
Decision and order affirmed, with the costs of this instance against the petitioner.
Ten days from the publication of this decision, judgment will be entered, and five days thereafter, the record will he remanded to the court below.
Avanceña, C. J., Street, Romualdez, and Imperial, JJ., concur.
同类文件 SC Decisions
- [ G.R. No. 89990. March 20, 1991 ](272-A Phil. 451)
- [ G.R. No. L-30960. October 05, 1989 ](258-A Phil. 83; 87 OG No. 14, 1940 (April 8, 1991))
- G.R. No. 249459, June 14, 2021
- [ G.R. No. 92772. November 28, 1996 ](332 Phil. 804)
- [ G.R. No. 137777. October 02, 2001 ](418 Phil. 715)
- A.M. No. 10-5-7-SC, December 07, 2010
- A.M. No. MTJ-93-881, August 03, 1998
- G.R. No. 193577, September 07, 2011
想要这份文件的分析?
让 ASG 法律 AI 为你总结、与其他判例对比,或说明它如何适用于你的情形 — 它检索的正是同一个数据库。