Air Manila, Inc., et al. vs. Court of Industrial Relations, et al.

G.R. No. L-39742, December 2, 1980; per Fernando, CJ.

Facts

Our basic per curiam Resolution of June 9, 1978 (reported in 83 SCRA 579) unanimously and correctly declared null and void the NLRC "decision" of March 30, 1976 which despite respondent AMILPA's (Air Manila Line Pilots Association) objection of res judicata would have granted petitioner AMI (Air Manila, Inc.) the very same relief already denied by the CIR's per curiam Resolution of October 10, 1974 (which granted only a limited recomputation or reopening of the approved computation of backpay award of P6,018,135.63 to respondents pilots by principally allowing petitioner AMI to prove and deduct their earnings elsewhere) as upheld by this Court's final judgment in the case at bar entered on June 22, 1975 and would have all over again brought the litigation back to square one by ordering a "total reopening of the disputed computation" made in the approved computation of award in implementation of the CIR's long final August 25, 1971 decision which granted such award after finding petitioner AMI guilty of unfair labor practice acts. The NLRC would in effect have overruled this Court's final judgment.

What remained was to avoid further protracted delays and for respondents pilots to be enabled to savor the fruits of their victory and to expedite the execution of the judgment and award in their favor, and following settled precedents cited in our per curiam Resolution of "fixing the amount of backwages at a reasonable level without qualification and deduction so as to relieve the employees from proving their earnings during their layoffs and the employer from submitting counter-proofs and thus obviate the twin evils of Idleness on the part of the employees and attrition and undue delay in satisfying the award on the part of the employer," we still reduced the total award by one-third or P2,006,045.21 to the net amount of P4,012,090.42 due and payable by way of net backwages and ordered our own Clerk of Court to forthwith issue a writ of execution for the said net amount. The Court's per curiam Resolution was unanimous, 1 including Mr. Justice Barredo who now has filed a "vehement dissent and protest" (while his vote then was " I concur but I reserve the making of a few observations").

Issue

Whether or not there is undue delay in the enforcement and implementation of the writ of execution issued by its Clerk of Court on June 14, 1978 against herein petitioner.

Ruling

The Court finds no further reason for delay in the enforcement and implementation of the writ of execution issued by its Clerk of Court on June 14, 1978 against petitioner Air Manila, Inc. for satisfaction of the total net amount of P4,012,090.42 (one third of the gross award of P6,018,135.63 or the sum of P2,006,045.21 having been d educted as and for earnings elsewhere) determined and awarded as and by way of net backwages, pursuant to the Court's per curiam Resolution of June 9, 1978, (reported in 83 SCRA 579, 592) — more than sufficient time and opportunity having been afforded petitioner Air Manila, Inc. and its owner-president, Ricardo C. Silverio since the hearing held on June 20, 1978 for the purpose of hearing any specific proposal from Mr. Silverio on how to satisfy the money judgment in the aforesaid amount of P4,012,090.42 and such amicable settlement as the parties may reach, for which purpose the Court had extended the period of suspension of the execution of the judgment up to June 28, 1978 only although several extensions were granted thereafter — and accordingly DENIES petitioner's motion for reconsideration of the aforesaid Resolution of June 9, 1978 and this denial is FINAL and immediately executory. The aforesaid writ of execution issued by the Clerk of Court is hereby made returnable to this Court within sixty (60) days from this date.