The Court of Appeals. FILE PHOTO
The Court of Appeals (CA) dismissed the bid of the government to stop the Manila Regional Trial Court from implementing an injunction it issued last year against the Land Transportation Office’s (LTO) P336-million license card supply project.
In a six page-resolution on Friday, the appeals court 14th Division through Associate Justice Renato Francisco said the Department of Transportation and Communications (DOTC) and LTO failed to show the need to lift the restraining order issued by the Manila court last October 1, 2015.
“This Court denies the prayer for writ of preliminary injunction as petitioners have not clearly demonstrated their clear legal right that would be protected by the issuance thereof,” the appeals court said.
“Suffice it to state that the exercise of its powers in awarding a contract to a winning bidder is highly regulated and an exercise of a duty rather than a right,” it added.
Manila Court Branch 49 Judge Daniel Villanueva stopped the implementation of the project due to “compelling prima facie evidence.”
The trial court used as basis the testimony of LTO finance chief Irenea Nueva during a hearing where she acknowledged that she would not have recommended the approval of the project—funded through the maintenance, operating and other expenses (MOOE)—if she had been informed beforehand that it included the purchase of capital equipment.
“What appears to be a contract for services, which may qualify it to be funded by MOOE, was in fact (a contract) for the purchase of computers and printers,” the court said in issuing an injunction.
Atty. Randy Bareng questioned the legality of the project in court. He said the original brochure submitted by the winning bidder, AllCards, showed printers with specifications for 300 dots per inch (dpi), but the respondents modified the brochure two days after the opening of the bid to “insert” an entry for a printer with 600-dpi capability.
Bareng added that the project evaded scrutiny from the Department of Budget and Management (DBM) by making it a one-year contract when it was supposedly designed for extension and negotiation.
“Suffice it to say that petitioners have not shown that extreme urgency exists so that a TRO (temporary restraining order) should be granted. There is, thus, no reason for this Court to restrain the RTC, in relation to the assailed order, at this point,” the CA ruled.
The project was supposed to address license card shortage that started in 2013 when the Commission on Audit disallowed payments to the previous supplier, Amalgamated Motors Philippines Inc., for lack of a proper contract.
Concurring with the ruling were Associate Justices Apolinario Bruselas, Jr. and Danton Bueser. RAM
RELATED STORIES
LTO warns of supply woes (again) after court stopped license card deal
DOJ finds P336-M driver’s license deal above board