[Link] VS.
PBSA
Facts: Students and some teachers of PSBA rallied andb a r r i c a d e d t h e s c h o o l b e c a u s e t h e y w a n t e d t o admin to hear their grievances with regards to notbeing able to participate in the policy-making of t h e s c h o o l , d e s p i t e t h e r e g u l a t i o n s s e t b y t h e admin with regards to protest actions During the regular enrollment period, petitioners ando t h e r s t u d e n t s s i m i l a r l y situated were allegedlyblacklisted and denied admission for the s e c o n d semester of school year 1986-1987 Consti Part 2: procedural due process court ordered the school authorities to create a special investigating committee to conduct an investigation, who made recommendations which the school adopted a lot of procedural crap, petitioners and respondents filing and answering the complaints petitioners claim that they have been deprived of dueprocess when they were barred from re-enrollment andf o r interveners teachers whose services have b e e n terminated as faculty members, on account of theirparticipation in the demonstration or protest chargedby respondents as "anarchic" rallies, and a violation of their constitutional rights of expression and assembly P e t i t i o n e r s a l l e g e t h a t t h e y h a v e b e e n d e p r i v e d o f procedural due process which requires that there be due notice and hear hearing and of substantive duep r o c e s s which requires that the person or body to conduct the investigation be c o m p e t e n t t o a c t a n d decide free from bias or prejudice. ISSUE: A.W hether or not there d e p r i v a t i o n o f d u e process ? B . W O N t h e r e w a s c o n t e m p t o f C o u r t t h e respondents
Private Schools states t h a t w h e n a c o l l e g e student registers in a school, it is understood that he is enrolling for the e n t i r e s e m e s t e r . Likewise, it is provided in the Manual, that the "written c o n t r a c t s " required for college teachers are f o r ' o n e semester. after the close of the first semester, the PSBA-Q C n o l o n g e r has any existing contract either with the students or with the intervening t e a c h e r s . I t i s a t i m e - honored principle that contracts are respected as the law between the contracting parties The contract having been terminated, there is no more contract to speak [Link] c h o o l c a n n o t b e c o m p e l l e d t o e n t e r i n t o a n o t h e r contract with said students and teachers . "The courts, be they the original trial court or the appellate court, have no power to make contracts for the parties."2 . The Court has s t r e s s e d , t h a t due process in disciplinary cases involving students does not entail proceedings and hearings similar to those prescribed for actions and proceedings in courts of justice. Standards of procedural due process area. the students must be informed in writing of the nature and cause of any accusation against thumb. t h e y s h a l l h a v e t h e right to answer t h e c h a r g e s against them, with the assistance of counsel, if desired. they shall be informed of the evidence against themed. they shall have the right to adduce evidence in their own behalf andante e v i d e n c e must be duly considered b y t h e investigating committee or official designated by the school authorities to hear and decide the case.3. Printed Rules and Regulations of the PSBA-Q.C. we redistributed at the beginning of each school Enrollment in the PSBA is contractual in nature a n d u p o n a d m i s s i o n t o t h e S c h o o l , t h e Student is d e e m e d t o h a v e agreed to bind himself to a l l a l l rules/regulations investigation conducted was fair, open, exhaustive and adequate. .B. No. The urgent motion of petitioners and interveners to c i t e r e s p o n d e n t s i n contempt of court is likewise untenable. [Link] defiance of authority b y m e r e f i l i n g o f M O R c o r respondent school explained that the interveners were actually reinstated a s s u c h f a c u l t y m e m b e r s a f t e r t h e issuance of the temporary mandatory injunction. [Link] school has fully complied with its duties under the temporary mandatory injunction
has
been
b y
HELD: A. NO. there was no deprivation of due process.1. There is no existing contract between the two [Link] 137 of Manual of Regulations for
The school manifested that while the investigation was going on, the intervenersfaculty members were teaching and it was only after the investigation, that the recommendations of the C o m m i t t e e w e r e adopted by the school and the l a t t e r moved for the dismissal of the c a s e f o r h a v i n g b e c o m e moot and academic.
are committed; or5 . w h e n a g r a v e a b u s e o f d i s c r e t i o n , a r b i t r a r i n e s s , o r capriciousness is manifest
promulgated by the Ministry of Education, Culture and Sports. F u r t h e r m o r e , h e agrees that he may be required to withdraw from the School at any time for reasons deemed sufficiently serious by the School Administration. Petitioners clearly violated the rules set out by the school with regard to the protest actions. Necessary action was t a k e n b y t h e s c h o o l w h e n t h e c o u r t i s s u e d a t e m p o r a r y mandatory injunction to accept the petitioners for the firsts & the creation of an investigating body.4. The Court, to insure that full justice is done both to the students and teachers on the one hand and the school on the other, ordered an investigation to be conducted by the school authorities, in the resolution of November 12, [Link] of the investigating committee: 1 . s t u d e n t s d i s r u p t e d c l a s s e s [Link] involved were found to be academicallyd e f i c i e n t & t h e teachers are found to have committed various acts of misconduct.5 . T h e right of the school to refuse reenrollment of students for academic delinquency and violation o f disciplinary regulations has always been recognized by this C o u r t T h u s , the Court has ruled that the schools refusal is sanctioned by law . Sec. 107 of the Manual of R e g u l a t i o n s for Private Schools considers a c a d e m i c delinquency and violation of disciplinary regulations vs. as valid grounds for refusing re-enrollment of students. The opposite view would do violence to the academic freedom e n j o y e d b y t h e school and enshrined under t h e [Link] ordinarily accords respect if not finality to factual findings of administrative tribunals, unless :1. the factual findings are not supported by evidence;2. where the findings are vitiated by fraud, imposition orcollusion;3. where the procedure which led to the factual findings isirregular;4. when palpable errors
