LAGUNA TAYABAS BUS CO. v.

PSC reversed only if it is: 1) without reasonable support in the evidence; 2) rendered
January 18, 1957 | Reyes, J. | Questions of Discretion against law; or 3) issued without jurisdiction.
Digester: Aspi, Maria Margarita Since the PSC could not anticipate how much time would be required by the
oppositors to submit their evidence, and the need for services had been duly
*Sorry, the digest is copy-pasted. I really cant find the original case established, the PSC had the power to authorize Lacdan to provisionally extend his
SUMMARY: Lacdan applied for a certificate of public convenience with the PSC to services.
operate a passenger and fright auto truck line. His application was opposed by Laguna
Tayabas Bus Co. and other operators. Lacdan applied for a provisional permit to
operate but the other operators objected on the ground that there was no urgent need
for the same. PSC granted the application for provisional permit. The SC held that PSC
did not abuse its discretion in granting the provisional permit.
DOCTRINE: SC will not substitute its judgment for that of the PSC, and
Commonwealth Act 146 emphasizes that its orders should be reversed only if it is: 1)
without reasonable support in the evidence; 2) rendered against law; or 3) issued without
jurisdiction.

FACTS:
Teodulo Lacdan applied for a certificate of public convenience with the Public
Service Commission (PSC) to operate a passenger and fright auto truck line on the
routes from Sta. Maria (Laguna) to Manila and from Sta. Rosa to Manila.
Laguna Tayabas Bus Co. and other operators opposed Lacdans application.
After he had finished presenting his evidence, Lacdan applied for a provisional
permit to operate, to which the other operators objected on the ground that there
was no urgent need for the same.
PSC granted the application for provisional permit.
Laguna Tayabas Bus Co. filed a petition for certiorari seeking to annul the grant of
provisional permit to Lacdan.

RULING: Petition denied.

Whether PSC abused its discretion in granting the provisional permit NO.
Petitioner claims that the order complained of was issued in grave abuse of
discretion amounting to excess of jurisdiction, because there was no finding that
the present services were inadequate or insufficient.
Although there is no express finding of inadequacy, the finding that residents of
Sta. Maria, Mabitac, Siniloan, Pangil, Pakil, Paete and Longos, being mostly farmers
and merchants, need more means of transportation for themselves and their
products, and that with the current number of trips provided by the other
operators, there is an average interval of 42 minutes between trips, which would be
reduced to 30 minutes if Lacdan was granted the provisional permit, are equivalent
to a determination that the present services are insufficient.
It was for the PSC to weigh the facts; erroneous application of the significance of
the competing facts does not mean that it has abused its discretion.
Well established is the rule that the SC will not substitute its judgment for that of
the PSC, and Commonwealth Act 146 emphasizes that its orders should be