Alcuaz vs.

PSBA
161 SCRA 7 May 2, 1988

TOPIC: Administrative Due Process

FACTS:
Petitioners are all bonafide students of the Philippine School of Business Administration, Quezon City, while
respondents, are the Philippine School of Business Administration (hereinafter referred to as PSBA) Quezon
City Branch, a 'non-stock institution of higher learning organized and existing under the laws of the
Philippines.
In spite of the agreement between the petitioner and PSBA, petitioner demanded the negotiation of a new
agreement, which demand was turned down by the school, resulting in mass assemblies and barricades of
school entrances.
During the regular enrollment period, petitioners and other students similarly situated were allegedly
blacklisted and denied admission for the second semester of school year 1986-1987.
President of the Student Council filed a complaint with the Director of the MECS against the PSBA for barring
the enrollment of the Student Council Officers and student leaders.
Simultaneously on the same date, the student council wrote the President, Board of Trustees, requesting for
a written statement of the schools final decision regarding their enrollment.
Another demand letter was made by Counsel for the students Atty. Alan Romullo Yap, also to the President,
Board of Trustees, to enroll his clients within 48 hours.
All these notwithstanding, no relief appeared to be forthcoming. The students filed a petition for review on
certiorari and prohibition with preliminary mandatory injunction.

ISSUE: Whether or not there has been a deprivation of constitutional rights of expression and assembly and of due
process of law of the students who have been barred from re-enrollment.

HELD:
Petition was dismissed.
A student once admitted by the school is considered enrolled for one semester. It is provided in Paragraph
137 Manual of Regulations for Private Schools, that when a college student registers in a school, it is
understood that he is enrolling for the entire semester. Thus after the close of the first semester, the PSBA-
QC no longer has any existing contract either with the students or with the intervening teachers.
The charge of denial of due process is untenable, there is no more contract to speak of. The school cannot be
compelled to enter into another contract with said students and teachers.
Due process in disciplinary cases involving students does not entail proceedings and hearings similar to those
prescribed for actions and proceedings in courts of justice. Such proceedings may be summary and cross-
examination is not even an essential part thereof. Accordingly, the minimum standards laid down by the
Court to meet the demands of procedural due process are: (1) the students must be informed in writing of
the nature and cause of any accusation against them; (2) they shall have the right to answer the charges
against them, with the assistance of counsel, if desired: (3) they shall be informed of the evidence against
them; (4) they shall have the right to adduce evidence in their own behalf and (5) the evidence must be duly
considered by the investigating committee or official designated by the school authorities to hear and decide
the case. Records show that the proceedings in the case at bar, at the outset satisfied conditions No. 1 and 2,
but, without a hearing, conditions No. 3, 4 and 5 had evidently not been completed with.