Significantly, Section 3, Rule 46 of the Revised Rules of Court
provides that:
“Section 3. Contents and filing of petition; effect of non-
compliance with requirements. –
xxxxx
In actions filed under Rule 65, the petition shall further
indicate the material dates showing when notice of the
judgment or final order or resolution subject thereof was
received, when a motion for new trial or reconsideration, if
any, was filed and when notice of the denial thereof was
received.
It shall be filed in seven (7) clearly legible copies together
with proof of service thereof on the respondent with the
original copy intended for the court indicated as such by
the petitioner, and shall be accompanied by a clearly
legible duplicate original or certified true copy of the
judgment, order, resolution, or ruling subject thereof,
such material portions of the record as are referred to
therein, and other documents relevant or pertinent
thereto. The certification shall be accomplished by the
proper clerk of court or by his duly authorized
representative, or by the proper officer of the court,
tribunal, agency or office involved or by his duly
authorized representative. The other requisite number of
copies of the petition shall be accompanied by clearly
legible plain copies of all documents attached to the
original.
xxxxx
The failure of the petitioner to comply with any of the
foregoing requirements shall be sufficient ground for
the dismissal of the petition.” (emphasis supplied)
Note that foregoing rules speak of two sets of documents to be
attached to the petition. The first set consists of certified true copies
of the judgment, order or resolution subject of the petition. Duplicate
originals or certified true copies thereof must be appended to enable
the reviewing court to determine whether the court, body or tribunal,
which rendered the same committed grave abuse of discretion. 1 The
second set consists of the pleadings, portions of the case
1
Durban Apartments Corporation v. Catacutan, G.R. No. 167136, December 14, 2005, 477
SCRA 801, 808.
record and other documents which are material and pertinent to
the petition.2
Also, in the case of Manila Midtown Hotel v. NLRC3, the
Supreme Court upheld the dismissal of a petition for failure of a party
to attach the required documents to his petition.
“Rule 65 of the then Rules of Court provides:
xxx
The petition shall be accompanied by a certified true
copy of the judgment or order subject thereof,
together with copies of all pleadings and documents
relevant and pertinent thereto.
In this regard, we have ruled that the failure of a party
to attach the required documents to his petition will
cause the dismissal thereof.
Needless to say, the omission of petitioners counsel to file
the required motion for reconsideration was simply
inexcusable. It should be observed that the assailed
decision of the NLRC was rendered on December 21,
1994; however, as early as 1989 we had the occasion to
stress that:
Petitioner, cannot, on its bare and self-serving
representation that reconsideration is not necessary,
unilaterally disregard what the law requires and deny the
respondent NLRC its right to review its pronouncement
before being haled (sic) to court to account therefor. On
policy reconsideration, such prerequisite would provide an
expeditious termination of labor disputes and asserts the
decongestions of Court dockets by obviating improvident
and unnecessary recourse to judicial proceedings. The
present case exemplifies the very contingency sought to
be, and which could have been, avoided by the
observance of said rules.
Procedural rules, like all rules, are required to be
followed except only for the most persuasive reasons
when they can be relaxed.
2
Teoville Homeowners Association, Inc. v. Ferriera, G.R. No. 140086. June 8, 2005, 459 SCRA
459, 469.
3
G.R. No. 118397; March 27, 1998
