The Supreme Court (SC) has ruled against an attempt by unseated Malabon-Navotas Representative Alvin Sandoval to reclaim his office.

In a 15-page ruling promulgated on March 9, the SC threw out the petition for certiorari filed by Sandoval against the decision of the House of Representatives Electoral Tribunal (HRET) to unseat him as congressman, representing the lone district of Malabon-Navotas.

It upheld the earlier findings of HRET that Josephine Veronique Lacson-Noel was the winner in the May 2007 congressional race.

Lacson-Noel, wife of An Waray Party-list Rep. Florencio “Bem” Noel, already assumed office last December after taking her oath of office before House Speaker Prospero Nograles.

The SC ruling came less than two months before the next elections on May 10.

The HRET composed of High Court justices and congressmen ruled on Sept. 24, 2009 after conducting a revision of ballots from contested precincts that Lacson-Noel won over Sandoval by just 542 votes.

Sandoval was proclaimed the winner after the May 2007 congressional elections with a margin of 1,169 votes over Lacson-Noel.

In his petition filed last year, Sandoval accused the HRET of committing “grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack of jurisdiction” for not admitting his formal offer of evidence.

However, the SC said a review of the proceedings in the HRET will reveal that the latter “acted in accordance with its rules of procedure and well within its jurisdiction.”

“In sum, there is absolutely nothing in this case that would justify a finding that the HRET gravely abused its discretion by not granting petitioner an extension of time to present additional evidence and formally offer the same,” the court said in the decision penned by Associate Justice Diosdado  Peralta.

In fact, the SC even admonished Sandoval for failing to submit his evidence despite being given enough time by the HRET.

“It is quite clear from the foregoing narration of how the proceedings were conducted that (Sandoval) was given all the opportunity to be heard. So many hearing dates were set for his presentation of evidence but he merely wasted a good number of those days. He was granted an extension of time so he could file his formal offer of evidence, but he still failed to fulfill his responsibility,” the court said.