6/5/2020 E-Library - Information At Your Fingertips: Printer Friendly only be appealed on ground of grave abuse of discretion. (Emphasis supplied) Two days later or on June 26, 2009, Principalia sought to stay the implementation of the June 8, 2009 POEA Order by filing with the RTC of Mandaluyong City a Complaint for Injunction with Application for Issuance of a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) and/or Writ of Preliminary Prohibitory and Mandatory Injunction.[9] It contended that the immediate cancellation of its license not only deprived it of due process but also jeopardized the deployment of hundreds of overseas Filipino workers. That same day, the Executive Judge of RTC Mandaluyong issued a 72-hour TRO[10] to allow the deployment of six workers who were already scheduled to leave for work abroad. In the meantime, Principalia appealed the June 8, 2009 POEA Order with the Office of the Secretary of the Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE Secretary) on July 8, 2009.[11] On July 22, 2009, POEA filed with the RTC a Motion to Dismiss[12] based on the grounds of lack of jurisdiction, failure to exhaust administrative remedies and forumshopping. According to it, (1) it is the DOLE Secretary and not the RTC which has jurisdiction over cases assailing POEA Orders which direct the cancellation of license of a recruitment agency; (2) assuming that the RTC has jurisdiction, Principalia nevertheless failed to exhaust administrative remedies since it failed to first seek recourse from the DOLE; and, (3) Principalia committed forum-shopping when it also later appealed the June 8, 2009 POEA Order with the DOLE. Ruling of the Regional Trial Court In its July 28, 2009 Order,[13] the RTC rejected POEA's arguments in its Motion to Dismiss. It held that: 1) it was conferred jurisdiction over injunction actions by Section 21 of Batas Pambansa Blg. 129 (BP 129), or the Judiciary Reorganization Act of 1980, as amended by Republic Act No. 7691 (RA 7691); 2) the case falls under the exception to the rule on exhaustion of administrative remedies since it appears that Principalia may suffer irreparable damage as a result of the immediate cancellation of its license; and, 3) there is no forum-shopping because there is neither identity of parties nor identity of relief between the injunction case and the appeal before the DOLE. Hence, the RTC denied the said motion. POEA moved for reconsideration[14] but the RTC remained unconvinced of its contentions that it denied the same in its October 5, 2009 Order.[15] Recapitulating the arguments in the said Motion to Dismiss, the Republic, through the POEA, questioned by way of Petition for Certiorari and Prohibition[16] the aforementioned July 28, 2009 and October 5, 2009 Orders of the RTC before the CA. Ruling of the Court of Appeals elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocsfriendly/1/61203 2/9