TOPIC: DISQUALIFICATION CANDIDATE MANALAD VS.

TRAJANO FACTS The parties are employees of United Dockhandlers, Inc, rival groups in the Associated Port Checkers and Workers' Union (APCWU) Petitioner led by Ricardo R. Manalad, with respondent Pablo B. Babula heading the group of private respondents. Although qualifications have been earlier questioned, Manalad et al won the elections for APCWU officers on November 26, 1984. Babula et al filed petition for review and on July 3, 1985, the court promulgated a resolution to dismiss petition for lack of merit and have petitioner Babula et al vacant APCWU offices and turnover management to Director of the Bureau of Labor Relations, all for immediate execution, to be followed by a special elections to be held on July 20, 1985 (to be held under the personal supervision of Director Trajano and his staff). Babula et al were alleged to refuse compliance with the above resolution as documented in the petition filed by Manalad et al. The July 20 1985 special election was held having Babula et al as winners and duly elected officials of APCWU. Manalad et al filed petition to disqualify Babula et al as winners due to their non-compliance to the July 3 1985 resolution, but Director Trajano dismissed their petition and proclaimed Babula et al as the winners of the July 20, 1985 special elections. Manalad et al, then, filed petition to SC to reverse resolution of Trajano, have Babula et al disqualified and annul the July 20 1985 elections/conduct re-elections. In 1988, when 3-year term for the disputed 1985 election expired, a new set of officers for ACPWU has been elected despite motion for RTO. Manalad et al prayed for the annulment of 1988 elections.

ISSUE Whether or not motion for annulment of 1988 elections is moot and academic

RULING Yes. The court found the motion for annulment of the 1988 ACPWU elections moot and academic for the ff reasons: - It is pointless and unrealistic to insist on annulling an election of officers whose terms had already expired. We must consequently abide by our consistent ruling that where certain events or circumstances have taken place during the pendency of the case which would render the case moot and academic, the 19 petition should be dismissed. - The court respects the will of the majority of the workers who voted in the November 28, 1988 elections. - Contentions of petitioners do not adequately establish the basis for contempt but respondents have satisfactorily answered the averments thereon. - Obtaining the second highest number of votes does not mean that they will thereby be considered as the elected officers if the true winners are disqualified.