epublic of the PhilippinesSUPREME COURTManilaFIRST DIVISIONG.R. No. 77372 April 29, 1988LUPO L. LUPANGCO, RAYMOND S. MANGKAL, NORMAN A. MESINA, ALEANDER R. REGUYAL, !OCELYN P. CATAPANG, ENRICO ". REGALADO, !EROME O. ARCEGA, ERNESTOC. #LAS, !R., ELPEDIO M. ALMA$AN, KARL CAESAR R. RIMANDO, petitioner, vs.COURT O% APPEALS &'( PRO%ESSIONAL REGULATION COMMISSION, respondent.Balgos & Perez Law Offices for petitioners.The Solicitor General for respondents. GANCAYCO, J.:Is the Reional Trial !ourt of the sa"e cateor# as the Professional Reulation !o""ission so that it cannot passupon the validit# of the ad"inistrative acts of the latter$ !an this !o""ission la%full# prohibit the e&a"iness fro"attendinrevie%classes, receivin handout "aterials, tips, or the li'e three ()* da#s before the date of thee&a"ination$ Theses are the issues presented to the court b# this petition for certiorari to revie% the decision of the!ourt of +ppeals pro"ulaated on ,anuar# -), -./0, in !+12.R. SP No. -34./,) declarin null and void the other dated Ocober 5-,-./6 issued b# the Reional Trial !ourt of Manila, 7ranch )5 in !ivil !ase No. /61)0.43 entitled 8 9upo 9. 9upanco, et al. vs. Professional Reulation !o""ission.8The records sho%s the follo%in undisputed facts:On or about October 6, -./6, herein respondent Professional Reulation !o""ission (PR!* issued Resolution No.-34 as parts of its 8+dditional Instructions to ;&a"iness,8 to all those appl#in for ad"ission to ta'e the licensuree&a"inations in accountanc#. The resolution e"bodied the follo%in pertinent provisions:No e&a"inee shall attend an# revie% class, briefin, conference or the li'e conducted b#, or shallreceivean#hand1out, revie%"aterial, oran#tipfro"an#school, colleeoruniversit#,oran#revie%centerortheli'eoran#revie%er,lecturer,instructorofficialore"plo#eeofan#oftheafore"entioned or si"ilars institutions durin the three da#s i""ediatel# proceedin ever#e&a"ination da# includin e&a"ination da#.+n# e&a"inee violatin this instruction shall be sub