COMELEC, et. al. vs Judge Ma. Luisa Quijano-Padilla RTC of QC Branch 215 and Photokina Marketing Corporation, GR. No. 151992, September 8, 2002
Subject: Obligations and Contracts
FACTS
Congress
passed Republic Act No. 8189, otherwise known as the "Voter’s Registration
Act of 1996," providing for the modernization and computerization of the
voters’ registration list and the appropriation of funds therefor "in
order to establish a clean, complete, permanent and updated list of voters."
Pursuant
to RA8189, COMELEC promulgated Resolution No. 00-0315 approving in principle
the Voters’ Registration and Identification System Project (VRIS Project for
brevity).
In
September 1999, the COMELEC issued invitations to pre-qualify and bid for the
supply and installation of information technology equipment and ancillary
services for its VRIS Project.
Private
respondent Photokina Marketing Corporation (PHOTOKINA) pre-qualified and was
allowed to participate as one of the bidders. After the public bidding was
conducted, PHOTOKINA’s bid in the amount of P6.588B and was declared the
winning bidder. In September 2000, the COMELEC issued the Notice of Award to
PHOTOKINA, which, in turn, immediately accepted the same. The parties then
proceeded to formalize the contract.
However,
under RA 8760 the budget appropriated by Congress for the COMELEC’s
modernization project was only P1B and that the actual available funds under
the Certificate of Availability of Funds (CAF) issued by the Chief Accountant
of the COMELEC was only P1.2B.
ISSUE
Whether
or not Photokina, a successful bidder, can compel a government agency to
formalize a contract with it notwithstanding that its bid exceeds the amount
appropriated by Congress for the project.
RULING
No.
Under the law (Art 1409, NCC), (4)
those contracts expressly prohibited or declared void by law are inexistent and
void from the beginning. These contracts cannot be ratified and the right to
set up the defense of illegality cannot be waived.
In
the case, there was an oversight of the legal requirements as early as the
bidding stage. The first step of a Bids and Awards Committee (BAC) is to
determine whether the bids comply with the requirements. The BAC shall rate a
bid "passed" only if it complies with all the requirements and the
submitted price does not exceed the approved budget for the contract." The
amount appropriated is insufficient to cover the cost of the entire VRIS
Project. There is no way that the COMELEC could enter into a contract with
PHOTOKINA whose accepted bid was way beyond the amount appropriated by law for
the project. This being the case, the BAC should have rejected the bid for
being excessive or should have withdrawn the Notice of Award on the ground that
in the eyes of the law, the same is null and void.
PHOTOKINA,
though the winning bidder, cannot compel the COMELEC to formalize the contract.
Since PHOTOKINA’s bid is beyond the amount appropriated by Congress for the
VRIS Project, the proposed contract is not binding upon the COMELEC and is considered
void; and that in issuing the questioned preliminary writs of mandatory and
prohibitory injunction and in not dismissing Special Civil Action No.
Q-01-45405, respondent judge acted with grave abuse of discretion. Petitioners
cannot be compelled by a writ of mandamus to discharge a duty that involves the
exercise of judgment and discretion, especially where disbursement of public
funds is concerned.
No comments:
Post a Comment