Manila
THIRD DIVISION
G.R. No. 122728 March 21, 1997
CASIANO A. ANGCHANGCO, JR., petitioner,
vs.
THE HON. OMBUDSMAN, ZALDY TAMAYO, GILDA NAVARRA, ODELIA LEGASPI, SALVADOR TAMAYO, GASPAR ABORQUE, ROEL ABAS, REMEDIOS OLITA, ET AL., TEODOBO TORREON, ET AL., JIMMY MARTIN, MENRADO ALLAWAN, MARGARITO ESCORIAL, NORBERTO OCAT AND ALEJANDRO ERNA, respondents.
R E S O L U T I O N
MELO, J.:
On February 13, 1997, this Court rendered a decision granting petitioner's petition for mandamus, the decretal portion of which reads as follows:
WHEREFORE, the Court RESOLVED to give DUE COURSE to the petition and to GRANT the same. Ombudsman Cases No. MIN-3-90-0671, MIN-90-0132, MIN-90-0133, MIN-90-0138, MIN-90-0188, MIN-90-0189, MIN-90-0190, MIN-90-0191, and MIN-90-0192 are ordered DISMISSED. The Office of the Ombudsman is further directed to issue the corresponding clearance in favor of petitioner. (p. 111, Rollo)
Upon receipt, petitioner immediately proceeded to the Office of Ombudsman, Manila to secure the corresponding clearance as mandated in the February 13, 1997 Decision.ℒαwρhi৷ Petitioner, however, was informed that the clearance can not be issued due to the fact that the decretal portion of the February 13, 1997 Decision failed to mention 4 cases which were also subject of the petition for mandamus, namely, MIN-90-0185, MIN-90-0193, MIN-90-0186, and MIN-90-0187. Petitioner was likewise advised by the Office of the Ombudsman to file the corresponding manifestation before this Court for clarification of the decretal portion of the February 13, 1997 Decision to include the said 4 cases.
Hence, this instant motion.
Indeed, the 4 cases, namely, MIN-90-0185, MIN-90-0193, MIN-90-0186, and MIN-90-0187 were likewise subject of the petition but were inadvertently excluded from the list of the cases ordered to be dismissed.
WHEREFORE, the decretal portion of the February 14, 1997 Decision is hereby amended to include MIN-90-0185, MIN-90-0193, MIN-90-0186 and MIN-90-0187, to wit:
WHEREFORE, the Court RESOLVED to give DUE COURSE to the petition and GRANT the same. Ombudsman Cases No. MIN-3-90-0671, MIN-90-0132, MIN-90-0133, MIN-900-138, MIN-90-0185, MIN-0-0193, MIN-90-0186, MIN-90-0187, MIN-90-0188, MIN-90-0189, MIN-90-0190, MIN-90-0191, and MIN-90-0912 are ordered DISMISSED. The Office of the Ombudsman is further directed to issue the corresponding clearance in favor of petitioner. (p. 114, Rollo)
SO ORDERED.
Narvasa, C.J., Davide, Jr., Francisco and Panganiban, JJ., concur.
The Lawphil Project - Arellano Law Foundation
