ATENEO DE MANILA UNIVERSITY, ET AL. v. HON.

IGNACIO
CAPULONG, ET AL. G.R. No. 99327

Facts: 
The Board found respondent students guilty of violating Rule No. 3 of
the Ateneo Law School Rules on Discipline which prohibits participation in
hazing activities. However, in view of the lack of unanimity among the members
of the Board on the penalty of dismissal, the Board left the imposition of the
penalty to the University Administration. Accordingly, Fr. Bernas imposed the
penalty of dismissal on all respondent students. Respondent students filed with
RTC Makati a TRO since they are currently enrolled. This was granted. A TRO
was also issued enjoining petitioners from dismissing the respondents. A day
after the expiration of the temporary restraining order, Dean del Castillo created
a Special Board to investigate the charges of hazing against respondent
students Abas and Mendoza. This was requested to be stricken out by the
respondents and argued that the creation of the Special Board was totally
unrelated to the original petition which alleged lack of due process. This was
granted and reinstatement
of the students was ordered.

Issue: Was there denial of due process against the respondent students.

Held: 
There was no denial of due process, more particularly procedural due process.
Dean of the Ateneo Law School, notified and required respondent students to
submit their written statement on the incident. Instead of filing a reply,
respondent students requested through their counsel, copies of the charges.
The nature and cause of the accusation were adequately spelled out in
petitioners' notices. Present is the twin elements of notice and hearing.