RCPI V. NTC G.R. No. L-68729 May 29, 1987
FACTS:
Petitioner has been operating a radio communications system since 1957 under its legislative franchise granted by Republic Act No. 2036 which was enacted on June 23, 1957.
Petitioner RCPI established a radio telegraph service in Catarman, Northern Samar; San Jose, Occidental Mindoro; and Sorsogon, Sorsogon.
In a decision dated June 24, 1980 in NTC Case No. 80-08, private respondent Kayumanggi Radio Network Incorporated was authorized by the public respondent to operate radio communications systems in Catarman, Samar and in San Jose, Mindoro.
The private respondent filed a complaint with the NTC alleging that the petitioner was operating in Catarman, Samar and in San Jose, Mindoro without a certificate of public convenience and necessity.
RCPI counter-alleged that its telephone services in the areas are covered by the legislative franchise recognized by NTC and its predecessor Public Service Commission.
In its supplemental reply, the petitioner RCPI further stated that it has been in operation in the questioned places long before private respondent Kayumanggi filed its application to operate in the same places.
After conducting the hearing, NTC ordered RCPI to immediately cease from operating in these 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.
RCPI’s MR was denied.
Hence, this petition.
ISSUE:
WON RCPI is required to secure a certificate of public convenience
HELD:
YES. The petitioner's main argument states that the abolition of the Public Service Commission under Presidential Decree No. 1 and the creation of the National Telecommunications Commission under Executive Order No. 546 to replace the defunct Public Service Commission did not affect sections 14 and 15 of the Public Service Law (Commonwealth Act. No. 146, as amended) has no merit.
it is clear that Executive Order No. 546, Section 15 that the exemption enjoyed by radio companies from the jurisdiction of the Public Service Commission and the Board of Communications no longer exists because of the changes effected by the Reorganization Law and implementing executive orders. The petitioner's claim that its franchise cannot be affected by Executive Order No. 546 on the ground that it has long been in operation since 1957 cannot be sustained.
A franchise, being merely a privilege emanating from the sovereign power of the state and owing its existence to a grant, is subject to regulation by the state itself by virtue of its police power through its administrative agencies.
WHEREFORE, the challenged order of the public respondent (NTC) dated August 22, 1984 is hereby AFFIRMED.