Appeal by the Philippine Veterans Board from a decision of  the  Court of  First  Instance   of  Manila, Judge Gavino S. Abaya presiding, ordering the board to  release Treasury Warrant  No.  2773868  for P1,253.23 and the treasury warrants covering the subsequent monthly pension payments corresponding to petitioner Paula  Aquino Policarpio, "as granted to her by law".

The facts  are not controverted.  The appellee was the widow of a member  of the  Armed Forces killed in action in  1942; upon  her  application  duly  approved, she was granted  a monthly pension by the appellant Board.  The pension  was  stopped  in  July  1948 because  the  widow received a similar  pension from U. S. Veterans Administration.   However, the latter  certified  to  the appellant that  the  widow had  ceased receiving her  pension from the  U S.  Veterans  Administration  since  1951,  where-upon, in  February 11, 1953, petitioner Policarpio applied to appellant for the  resumption of her  former pension. On February 28,  1953, the Secretary of the Philippine Veterans Board issued a  memorandum that  petitioner's pension  was resumed effective January 30,  1951;  and in view  thereof the auditor caused treasury warrants to be  prepared in favor  of the widow.  Delivery  of  the warrants was,  however,  subsequently stopped, for  the reason that the appellant  Board "had  not yet  granted the restoration  of  the petitioner's pension".

On the' basis of  such facts, and in view  of  the  refusal of the board officers  to release the warrants, petitioner Policarpio applied  to the Court of First Instance for a writ  of  mandamus to compel their  release.   In its  answer the board specifically pleaded that the  preparation of the warrants was ordered by mistake, because Policarpio's  petition  had not been  as  yet  acted upon by  the Board.

Submitted on the facts alleged, by agreement  of  the parties the court below decreed the issuance of the writ complained of  on  the basis that

 "The fact that the Secretary has signed the memorandum for the chairman  of  the  board restoring petitioner's pension,  and the further fact  that said check has been drawn  by virtue  of  such memorandum  are sufficient reasons to justify  the release of the same in payment of petitioner's accumulated pension".  (Rec. p. 45)

The decision  is untenable.  It being an established  fact that  the  resumption of the pension had not yet been approved by the  Veterans Board, the memorandum of the Secretary and the preparation of the warrants  were obviously unauthorized,  and the taking of such action proves nothing  but that the error or lack of authority was not discovered' until later, as shown  by the subsequent withholding of  the  warrants.

It was improper to  compel  delivery  of the warrants, because the Board might, in the exercise of it& discretion, refuse to  restore petitioner's  pension;  and even if its refusal should be wrongful or  erroneous, the court could not properly intervene until the appellee-petitioner should have exhausted her administrative remedies.   (De la Paz vs.  Alcaraz, supra, p. 130; Miguel  vs. Vda. de Reyes, 93 Phil., 542.)   Therefore, the court below should have limited itself to ordering the Board to take action upon Policarpio's petition that her pension payments be resumed.

 "* *  * And it is a well-settled rule  that  mandamus  does not lie to review or control  the action or decision of a pension board or other board or officer having  authority over  pension matters, where  the action or decision is one resting  in  the discretion of such board or officer, or where it involves the construction of the law  and the application  of the  facts  thereto. * * * Where  a pension board or officer simply refuses to take any action whatever, the court  will issue a mandamus  to compel it or him to take some action, but will not attempt to prescribe the  action to be taken and thereby control the discretion  or  judgment of the board or officer.  * * *" '(40 Am.  Jur.  pp. 993, 994).

The decision appealed from is modified in  the sense of merely requiring the  appellant  Philippine Veterans Board to act without delay upon the application of February 11, 1953 for the restoration  of  pension benefits to appellee Paula, Aquino Policarpio.  Without  costs.  So  ordered.

Paras,  C. J.,  Bengzon, Padilla, Montemayor,  Bautista. Angelo, Labrador, Concepcion, Endenda,  and  Felix, JJ., concur.