[ G. R. No. L-6482. July 17, 1953 ]
[ G. R. No. L-6482. July 17, 1953 ]
[ G. R. No. L-6482. July 17, 1953 ]
MANUEL A. CONCORDIA, PETITIONER VS. ARTURO M. TOLENTINO AND THE HONORABLE ELECTORAL TRIBUNAL OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, RESPONDENTS.
D E C I S I O N
JUGO, J.:
The petitioner Manuel A. Concordia was appointed by the Nacionalista Party member of the Electoral Tribunal of the House of Representatives he being then a Nacionalista Congressman. Later he was dismissed by the Nacionalista members of the House of Representatives and substituted by Arturo M. Tolentino, another Nacionalista Congressman. The petitioner alleges that the reason for the substitution was that the Nacionalista Party disapproved of his vote against Emmanuel Pelaez in the protest of Rodrigo C. Lim against the former, based on the ground that Emmanuel Pelaez did not have sufficient residence in the district for which he was elected Congressman.
Consequently Manuel A. Concordia filed in this Court a petition for quo warranto against Arturo Tolentino, praying that the petitioner's dismissal from the Electoral Tribunal and the appointment in his stead of Arturo Tolentino be declared null and void, and that he be reinstated in said position and Arturo Tolentino ousted therefrom.
It appearing that the petitioner Manuel A. Concordia has already left the Nacionalista Party and joined the Liberal Party, his petition now lacks proper basis.
His petition is, therefore, dismissed without pronouncement as to costs. It is so ordered.
Paras, C. J., Pablo, Bengzon, Tuason, Montemayor and Labrador, JJ., concur.
同类文件 SC Decisions
- G.R. No. 235316, December 01, 2021
- [ G.R. No. 12693. August 11, 1917 ](G.R. No. 12693)
- [ Adm. Case No. 492. September 05, 1967 ]
- [ G.R. No. 9278. December 07, 1915 ](G.R. No. 9278)
- [ G.R. No. 201427. March 18, 2015 ](756 Phil. 325)
- [ G.R. No. 196476. September 28, 2020 ](886 Phil. 348)
- [ G.R. No. 10405. December 29, 1960 ](G.R. No. 10405)
- [ G.R. No. 224549. August 07, 2017 ](815 Phil. 696)
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。