Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword
Like this
2Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
WARM - Petition for Certiorari, Prohibition, and Mandamus

WARM - Petition for Certiorari, Prohibition, and Mandamus

Ratings: (0)|Views: 755|Likes:
Published by Jojo Malig
WARM - Petition for Certiorari, Prohibition, and Mandamus
WARM - Petition for Certiorari, Prohibition, and Mandamus

More info:

Published by: Jojo Malig on Aug 06, 2013
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

09/18/2013

pdf

text

original

 
REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINESSUPREME COURTMANILA
 EN BANC
 W 
ATER FOR
A
LL
R
EFUND
M
OVEMENT
(WARM),
 
I
NC
.
,
 
represented by itsPresident,
 
R
ODOLFO
B.
 
 J
AVELLANA
 J
R
.
, and
M
ARCELO
L.
 
T
ECSON
,
 
Petitioners,—versus—
SC
 
G.R.
 
N
O
.
 
 ________________ 
For: Certiorari and Prohibitionwith Prayer for Issuance of Temporary Restraining Order and/or Writ of PreliminaryInjunction
The
M
ETROPOLITAN
 W 
ATERWORKS
&
 
S
EWERAGE
S
YSTEM
(MWSS)
;
R
AMON
B.
 
A
LIKPALA
 J
R
.
, in hiscapacity as Chairman of the Boardof Trustees of the
M
ETROPOLITAN
 W 
ATERWORKS
&
 
S
EWERAGE
S
YSTEM
;
A
TTY
.
 
R
AOUL
C.
 
C
REENCIA
 ,
 
M
A
.
 
C
ECILIA
G.
 
S
ORIANO
 ,
 
 J
OSE
R
AMON
T.
 
V
ILLARIN
 , B
ENJAMIN
 J.
 
Y
AMBAO
 ,
 
N
ATHANIEL
C.
 
S
ANTOS
 ,
 
Z
OILO
L.
 
A
NDIN
 J
R
.
, and
L
EONOR
C
LEOFAS
,in their capacities as Members ofthe Board of Trustees of the
M
ETROPOLITAN
 W 
ATERWORKS
&
 
S
EWERAGE
S
YSTEM
;
G
ERARDO
A.I.
 
E
SQUIVEL
, in his capacity asAdministrator and/or ViceChairman of the
M
ETROPOLITAN
 W 
ATERWORKS
&
 
S
EWERAGE
S
YSTEM
; the
M
ETROPOLITAN
 W 
ATERWORKS
&
 
S
EWERAGE
S
YSTEM
R
EGULATORY
O
FFICE
;
A
TTY
.
 
E
MMANUEL
L.
 
C
APARAS
, inhis capacity as Chief Regulator ofthe
M
ETROPOLITAN
 W 
ATERWORKS
&
 
S
EWERAGE
S
YSTEM
R
EGULATORY
O
FFICE
, and in his capacity asMember of the Board of Trustees of
 
WARM and Tecson v. MWSS, et al.SC G.R. No. ______________ Petition for Certiorari, Prohibition, and Mandamus, with Prayer for Issuance of Temporary Restraining Order and/or Writ of Preliminary Injunction, Accounting, and RefundPage 2
the
M
ETROPOLITAN
 W 
ATERWORKS
&
 
S
EWERAGE
S
YSTEM
;
M
ANILA
 W 
ATER
C
OMPANY
 ,
 
I
NC
.
, and
M
AYNILAD
 W 
ATER
S
YSTEMS
 ,
 
I
NC
.
,
Respondents.
 x -— -— -— -— -— -— -— -— -— x
PETITION FOR CERTIORARI, PROHIBITION,
and 
 MANDAMUS
with
PRAYER
 for:
 
I
. I
SSUANCE OF
S
TATUS
Q
UO
 A
 NTE
O
 RDER
 ,
 
T
EMPORARY
R
ESTRAINING
O
RDER
(TRO),
 
and/or 
 W 
RIT OF
P
RELIMINARY
I
NJUNCTION
 ;
II
. A
CCOUNTING
 ;
AND
 
III
. R
EFUND
.
P
ETITIONERS
W
ATER FOR
A
LL
R
EFUND
M
OVEMENT
(WARM),represented herein by its President of
 
R
ODOLFO
B.
 
 J
AVELLANA
 J
R
., andM
ARCELO
L.
 
T
ECSON
, by counsel, to this Honorable Court, respectfullystate:
PRELIMINARY CONSIDERATIONS
P
REFATORY
 1.
 
History has an uncanny way of repeating itself. Duringthe Water Crisis, then-President F
IDEL
V.
 
R
AMOS
decreed therehabilitation of the country’s waterworks system and, due torampant corruption, the reorganization of the Metropolitan ManilaWaterworks System.
 
WARM and Tecson v. MWSS, et al.SC G.R. No. ______________ Petition for Certiorari, Prohibition, and Mandamus, with Prayer for Issuance of Temporary Restraining Order and/or Writ of Preliminary Injunction, Accounting, and RefundPage 3
2.
 
This led to the passing of the Water Crisis Act, which,among other provisions, advocated the privatization of water service.3.
 
Ultimately, two concessions were established—the Eastand West Service Areas—which were ultimately awarded to ManilaWater Co., Inc. and Maynilad Water Systems, Inc., respectively.4.
 
These concessionaires were tasked with the rehabilitationof the waterworks system already in place. And this came at a price.a. First, the concessionaires had to be permittedto recover losses during the entire 25-year concessions.b. Second, the MWSS was mandated tocooperate with these concessionaires.c. Third, the MWSS Regulatory Office wascreated through funding by—and, as will be seen later,under virtual control of—the concessionaires themselves.5.
 
Eventually, this setup was aggravated by arbitraryinterpretations by the concessionaires, with the blessing of the MWSSand its Regulatory Office, on the extent of “expenditures” that maybe passed on to the water consumers within their respective ServiceAreas. Even income taxes—which, as previously held by thisHonorable Court, may not be properly characterized as“expenditures”—were passed on to water consumers anyway. Eventhe costs for projects that were admitted to have been “failed”undertakings were likewise passed on.6.
 
It is for these reasons—all grounded on the sheer greedand blatant disregard by respondents for the welfare of the waterconsumers—that petitioners now elevate this matter to thisHonorable Court.N
ATURE OF THE
P
ETITION
 1.
 
This is a
Petition for Certiorari
,
1
Prohibition
,
2
 
and Mandamus
,
3
 
pursuant to Rule 65 of the 1997 Revised Rules of Court:
1
R.
 
C
IV
.
 
P. 65, § 1.

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
scribd
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->