Republic of the Philippines

SUPREME COURT
SECOND DIVISION
G.R. No. 159145. April 29, 2005
DEPARTMENT OF AGRARIAN REFORM ADJUDICATION BOARD DARAB! o" #$%
DEPARTMENT OF AGRARIAN REFORM DAR!, REPRESENTED &' DAR
SECRETAR( ROBERTO M. PAGDANGANAN, Petitioners,
vs.
JOSEFINA S. )UBRICA, i* $%r +,p,+i#' ,- A--i.*%% o" #$% ri.$#- ,*/ i*#%r%-# o"
FEDERICO SUNTA(, Respondents.
D E C I S I O N
TINGA, J.0
Before this Court is an appeal b certiorari under Rule !" of the #$$% Rules of Civil Procedure,
see&in' the reversal of the Decision
#
of the Court of (ppeals in C()*.R. SP No. ++%#, 'rantin'
herein respondent-s petition for prohibition and its Resolution
.
denin' herein petitioner-s
/otion for reconsideration.
0his Court adopts the appellate court-s narration of facts.
On (u'ust !, .,,,, 1ederico Sunta, no2 deceased, filed a petition for fi3in' and pa/ent of
4ust co/pensation under Presidential Decree No. .% a'ainst the Depart/ent of ('rarian Refor/
56D(R67, the D(R Re'ional Director for Re'ion IV and the 8and Ban& of the Philippines
568and Ban&67.
9
Doc&eted as D(R(B Case No. V),!,"),,,#),,, the case 2as filed before the
Office of the Re'ional ('rarian Refor/ (d4udicator 56R(R(D67 and raffled to (d4udicator
Conchita :i;as. Sub4ect of the case 2as Sunta-s landholdin's coverin' a total area of $!<.#$##
hectares situated in Sablaan, Occidental :indoro and e/braced under 0ransfer Certificate of
0itle 0)9#. 0he D(R and 8and Ban& deter/ined its value at 1our :illion 02o =undred 1ift)
One 0housand One =undred 1ort)One Pesos and +<>#,, 5P!,."#,#!#.+<7 or 1our 0housand
1our =undred Ninet)Seven Pesos and ",>#,, 5P!,!$%.",7 per hectare, 2hich valuation
accordin' to Sunta, 2as unconscionabl lo2 and tanta/ount to ta&in' of propert 2ithout due
process of la2.
!
(fter su//ar ad/inistrative proceedin's, the R(R(D rendered a Decision
"
on ?anuar .!,
.,,# in favor of Sunta, orderin' 8and Ban& to pa the for/er the a/ount of One =undred
1ift)Seven :illion 1ive =undred 1ort)One 0housand Nine =undred 1ift)One Pesos @
9,>#,, 5P#"%,"!#,$"#.9,7 as 4ust co/pensation for the ta&in' of a total of $!<.#$## hectares of
Sunta-s properties. 8and Ban& sou'ht reconsideration of the R(R(D decision for not bein'
supported b clear and convincin' evidence and for its conclusions 2hich are contrar to la2.
=o2ever, in an Order
+
dated :arch #!, .,,#, the R(R(D denied 8and Ban&-s /otion. 8and
Ban& received a cop of the order of denial on :arch .+, .,,#.
%
On (pril .,, .,,#, 8and Ban& filed a petition for 4ust co/pensation
<
2ith the Re'ional 0rial
Court 5R0C7 of San ?ose, Occidental :indoro a'ainst Sunta, D(R, and R(R(D. 0he petition,
doc&eted as ('rarian Case No. R)#.!#, praed that 4ust co/pensation for the ta&in' of Sunta-s
landholdin's be declared in the a/ount of 1our :illion 02o =undred 1ift One 0housand, One
=undred 1ort)One Pesos 5P!,."#,#!#.,,7. Sunta /oved to dis/iss the petition on the 'rounds
of lac& of capacit to sue, lac& of cause of action, and res judicata. (fter 8and Ban& filed its
co//ent on Sunta-s /otion to dis/iss, the R0C, sittin' as a special a'rarian court, dis/issed
on (u'ust +, .,,# 8and Ban&-s petition for failure to pa the doc&et fees 2ithin the
re'le/entar period.
$
0he special a'rarian court also denied 8and Ban&-s Motion for
Reconsideration for bein' pro)for/a.
#,
0hereafter, 8and Ban& appealed the order of dis/issal to
the Court of (ppeals b filin' a Notice of Appeal 2ith the special a'rarian court.
##
Ahile the petition for 4ust co/pensation 2as pendin' 2ith the special a'rarian court, upon
/otion of Sunta, the R(R(D issued an Order
#.
on :a .., .,,#, declarin' its ?anuar .!,
.,,# Decision as final and e3ecutor after notin' that 8and Ban&-s petition for 4ust
co/pensation 2ith the special a'rarian court 2as filed beond the fifteen)da re'le/entar
period in violation of Section ##, Rule BIII of the D(R(B Rules of Procedure.
#9
In its ?ul #,,
.,,# Order,
#!
the R(R(D denied 8BP-s /otion for reconsideration of the order of finalit. On
?ul #<, .,,#, the R(R(D issued a Writ of Execution,
#"
directin' the Re'ional Sheriff of
D(R(B)Re'ion IV to i/ple/ent its ?anuar .!, .,,# Decision.
0hus, 8and Ban& filed a Petition for Certiorari with Prayer for the Issuance of e!porary
Restrainin" Order#Preli!inary Injunction
#+
before the D(R(B on Septe/ber #., .,,# a'ainst
Sunta and R(R(D. 0he petition, doc&eted as DSC( No. ,."., praed for the nullification of
the follo2in' issuances of the R(R(DC D#E the ?anuar .!, .,,# Decision directin' 8and Ban&
to pa Sunta 4ust co/pensation in the a/ount of P#"%,"!#,$"#.9,F D.E the Order dated :a ..,
.,,# declarin' the finalit of the aforesaid DecisionF D9E the ?ul #,, .,,# Order denin' 8and
Ban&-s /otion for reconsiderationF and D!E the Writ of Execution dated ?ul #<, .,,#. On
Septe/ber #., .,,#, the D(R(B issued an Order
#%
en4oinin' the R(R(D fro/ /o/entaril
i/ple/entin' its ?anuar .!, .,,# Decision and directin' the parties to attend the hearin' for the
purpose of deter/inin' the propriet of issuin' a preli/inar>per/anent in4unction.
On Septe/ber .,, .,,#, ?osefina 8ubrica, the successor)in)interest of Sunta, filed 2ith the
Court of (ppeals a Petition for Prohi$ition,
#<
doc&eted as C()*.R. SP No. ++%#,. 0he petition,
i/pleadin' D(R(B and 8and Ban& as respondents, sou'ht to en4oin D(R(B fro/ further
proceedin' 2ith DSC( No. ,."., /ainl on the theor that Republic (ct 5R.(.7 No. ++"%,
2hich confers ad4udicator functions upon the D(R, does not 'rant D(R 4urisdiction over
special civil actions for certiorari. On the sa/e da, the Court of (ppeals 'ranted 8ubrica-s
praer for a te/porar restrainin' order.
#$
0his not2ithstandin', D(R(B issued a Writ of
Preli!inary Injunction
.,
on October 9, .,,#, directin' R(R(D not to i/ple/ent its ?anuar .!,
.,,# Decision and the other orders in relation thereto, includin' the Writ of Execution.
On October <, .,,#, D(R(B filed a Co!!ent
.#
in C()*.R. SP No. ++%#,, ar'uin' that the 2rit
of certiorari>in4unction 2as issued under its po2er of supervision over its subordinates>dele'ates
li&e the P(R(Ds and R(R(Ds to restrain the e3ecution of a decision 2hich had not et attained
finalit. In an o/nibus /otion filed on October #,, .,,#, 8ubrica sou'ht to nullif the Writ of
Preli!inary Injunction issued b D(R(B in DSC( No. ,.". and to cite the D(R(B for
conte/pt.
..
8and Ban& also filed its Co!!ent
.9
on October #", .,,#, raisin' the pre/aturit of
8ubrica-s petition for prohibition. It contended that the issue of 2hether or not D(R(B can ta&e
co'niGance of 8and Ban&-s petition for certiorari /a be elevated to the Office of the D(R
Secretar, in accordance 2ith the doctrine of e3haustion of ad/inistrative re/edies. 8and Ban&
also Huestioned 8ubrica-s personalit to file the petition for prohibition considerin' that she
never intervened in the proceedin's before the R(R(D.
0he Court of (ppeals rendered the assailed Decision
.!
on (u'ust .., .,,.. 0he appellate court
ruled that petitioner D(R(B had no personalit to file a co//ent on 8ubrica-s petition for
prohibition filed 2ith the Court of (ppeals because D(R(B 2as a /ere for/al part and could
file a co//ent onl 2hen specificall and e3pressl directed to do so. 0he appellate court also
ruled that D(R(B-s e3ercise of 4urisdiction over the petition for certiorari had no constitutional
or statutor basis. It re4ected D(R(B-s contention that the issuance of the 2rit of certiorari arose
fro/ its po2er of direct and functional supervision over the R(R(D. In su/, the Court of
(ppeals declared that D(R(B 2as 2ithout 4urisdiction to ta&e co'niGance of DSC( No. ,.".
and issued a Writ of Prohi$ition, perpetuall en4oinin' D(R(B fro/ proceedin' 2ith DSC( No.
,.". and orderin' its dis/issal.
=ence, the instant petition, in 2hich D(R(B assi'ns the follo2in' errors to the Court of
(ppealsC
0he =onorable Court of (ppeals erred 2hen it ruledC
#. 0=(0 0=E PE0I0IONER 5D(R(B7, BEIN* ( 1OR:(8 P(R0I, S=OJ8D NO0 =(VE
1I8ED CO::EN0 0O 0=E PE0I0ION (ND INS0E(D, I0 S=OJ8D =(VE BEEN CO)
RESPONDEN0 8(ND B(NK, 0=E 1IN(NCI(8 IN0ER:EDI(RI O1 C(RPF
.. 0=(0 PE0I0IONER =(S NO ?JRISDIC0ION OVER DSC( ,.". A=IC= IS ( PE0I0ION
1OR CERIORARIF (ND
9. 0=(0 ARI0 O1 PRE8I:IN(RI IN?JNC0ION ISSJED BI D(R(B IN DSC( ,.". A(S
NJ88 (ND VOID 1OR =(VIN* BEEN ISSJED IN VIO8(0ION O1 0=E 0E:POR(RI
RES0R(ININ* ORDER I0 ISSJED.
."
0his Court affir/s the rulin' of the Court of (ppeals that the D(R(B does not have 4urisdiction
over 8and Ban&-s petition for certiorari.
?urisdiction, or the le'al po2er to hear and deter/ine a cause or causes of action, /ust e3ist as a
/atter of la2.
.+
It is settled that the authorit to issue 2rits of certiorari, prohibition, and
!anda!us involves the e3ercise of ori'inal 4urisdiction 2hich /ust be e3pressl conferred b
the Constitution or b la2.
.%
It is never derived b i/plication. Indeed, 2hile the po2er to issue
the 2rit of certiorari is in so/e instance conferred on all courts b constitutional or statutor
provisions, ordinaril, the particular courts 2hich have such po2er are e3pressl desi'nated.
.<
Pursuant to Section #% of E3ecutive Order 5E.O.7 No. ..$ and Section #9 of E.O. No. #.$)(, the
D(R(B 2as created to act as the Huasi)4udicial ar/ of the D(R. Aith the passa'e of R.(. No.
++"%, the ad4udicator po2ers and functions of the D(R 2ere further delineated 2hen, under
Section ", thereof, it 2as vested 2ith the pri/ar 4urisdiction to deter/ine and ad4udicate
a'rarian refor/ /atters and e3clusive ori'inal 4urisdiction over all /atters involvin' the
i/ple/entation of a'rarian refor/ e3cept those fallin' under the e3clusive 4urisdiction of the
Depart/ent of ('riculture, Depart/ent of Environ/ent and Natural Resources and the Special
('rarian Courts. 0he sa/e provision 'ranted the D(R the po2er to su//on 2itnesses,
ad/inister oaths, ta&e testi/on, reHuire sub/ission of reports, co/pel the production of boo&s
and docu/ents and ans2ers to interro'atories and issue subpoena and subpoena duces tecu!,
and enforce its 2rits throu'h sheriffs or other dul deputiGed officers, and the broad po2er to
adopt a unifor/ rule of procedure to achieve a 4ust, e3peditious and ine3pensive deter/ination of
cases before it.
.$
Section #9 of E.O. No. #.$)( also authoriGed the D(R to dele'ate its
ad4udicator po2ers and functions to its re'ional offices.
0o this end, the D(R(B adopted its Rules of Procedure, 2here it dele'ated to the R(R(Ds and
P(R(Ds the authorit 6to hear, deter/ine and ad4udicate all a'rarian cases and disputes, and
incidents in connection there2ith, arisin' 2ithin their assi'ned territorial 4urisdiction.6
9,
In the
absence of a specific statutor 'rant of 4urisdiction to issue the said e3traordinar 2rit of
certiorari, the D(R(B, as a Huasi)4udicial bod 2ith onl li/ited 4urisdiction, cannot e3ercise
4urisdiction over 8and Ban&-s petition for certiorari. Neither the Huasi)4udicial authorit of the
D(R(B nor its rule)/a&in' po2er 4ustifies such self)confer/ent of authorit.
In 'eneral, the Huantu/ of 4udicial or Huasi)4udicial po2ers 2hich an ad/inistrative a'enc /a
e3ercise is defined in the enablin' act of such a'enc. In other 2ords, the e3tent to 2hich an
ad/inistrative entit /a e3ercise such po2ers depends lar'el, if not 2holl, on the provisions
of the statute creatin' or e/po2erin' such a'enc.
9#
0he 'rant of ori'inal 4urisdiction on a Huasi)
4udicial a'enc is not i/plied. 0here is no Huestion that the le'islative 'rant of ad4udicator
po2ers upon the D(R, as in all other Huasi)4udicial a'encies, bodies and tribunals, is in the
nature of a li/ited and special 4urisdiction, that is, the authorit to hear and deter/ine a class of
cases 2ithin the D(R-s co/petence and field of e3pertise. In conferrin' ad4udicator po2ers and
functions on the D(R, the le'islature could not have intended to create a re'ular court of 4ustice
out of the D(R(B, eHuipped 2ith all the vast po2ers inherent in the e3ercise of its 4urisdiction.
0he D(R(B is onl a Huasi)4udicial bod, 2hose li/ited 4urisdiction does not include authorit
over petitions for certiorari, in the absence of an e3press 'rant in R.(. No. ++"%, E.O. No. ..$
and E.O. No. #.$)(.
In addition, Rule BIII, L## of the D(R(B Rules of Procedure allo2s a part 2ho does not a'ree
2ith the R(R(D-s preli/inar valuation in land co/pensation cases fifteen 5#"7 das fro/
receipt of notice to brin' the /atter to the proper special a'rarian court, thusC
SEC0ION ##. 8and Valuation and Preli/inar Deter/ination and Pa/ent of ?ust
Co/pensation. 0he decision of the (d4udicator on land valuation and preli/inar deter/ination
and pa/ent of 4ust co/pensation shall not be appealable to the Board but shall be brou'ht
directl to the Re'ional 0rial Courts desi'nated as Special ('rarian Courts 2ithin fifteen 5#"7
das fro/ receipt of the notice thereof. (n part shall be entitled to onl one /otion for
reconsideration.
In Philippine %eterans &an' (s) Court of Appeals,
9.
this Court affir/ed the dis/issal of a
lando2ner-s petition for 4udicial deter/ination of 4ust co/pensation for its failure to file the
petition 2ithin the fifteen)da re'le/entar period provided under Rule BIII, L## of the
D(R(B Rules of Procedure.
In the instant case, 8and Ban& received a cop of the R(R(D order denin' its /otion for
reconsideration on :arch .+, .,,#. 8and Ban& filed the petition for 4ust co/pensation 2ith the
special a'rarian court onl on (pril .,, .,,#, 2hich is doubtlessl beond the fifteen)da
re'le/entar period. 0hus, the R(R(D Decision had alread attained finalit in accordance
2ith the afore)Huoted rule, not2ithstandin' 8and Ban&-s recourse to the special a'rarian court.
D(R(B ta&es e3ception to the 'eneral rule that 4urisdiction over special civil actions /ust be
e3pressl conferred b la2 before a court or tribunal can ta&e co'niGance thereof. It believes that
this principle is applicable onl in cases 2here the officials>entities conte/plated to be sub4ect
thereof are not 2ithin the ad/inistrative po2er>co/petence, or in an /anner under the control
or supervision, of the issuin' authorit.
0his Court is not persuaded. 0he function of a 2rit of certiorari is to &eep an inferior court
2ithin the bounds of its 4urisdiction or to prevent it fro/ co//ittin' such a 'rave abuse of
discretion a/ountin' to e3cess of 4urisdiction.
99
In the instant case, the R(R(D issued the order
of finalit and the 2rit of e3ecution upon the belief that its decision had beco/e final and
e3ecutor, as authoriGed under Section #, Rule BII of the D(R(B Rules of Procedure. It is
2orth notin' that in its petition, D(R(B /aintains that in preventin' the R(R(D fro/
i/ple/entin' its decision, it /erel 6e3ercised its residual po2er of supervision, to insure that
the R(R(D acted 2ithin the bounds of dele'ated authorit and>or prevent>avoid her fro/
co//ittin' 'rave and serious disservice to the Pro'ra/.6
9!
D(R(B-s action, therefore, is a
rectification of 2hat it perceived as an abuse of the R(R(D-s 4urisdiction. B its o2n
ad/ission, D(R(B too& upon itself the po2er to correct errors of 4urisdiction 2hich is
ordinaril lod'ed 2ith the re'ular courts b virtue of e3press constitutional 'rant or le'islative
enact/ents.
0his Court reco'niGes the supervisor authorit of the D(R(B over its dele'ates, na/el, the
R(R(Ds and P(R(Ds, but the sa/e should be e3ercised 2ithin the conte3t of ad/inistrative
supervision and>or control. In the event that the R(R(Ds or P(R(Ds act beond its
ad4udicator functions, nothin' prevents the a''rieved part fro/ availin' of the e3traordinar
re/ed of certiorari, 2hich is ordinaril 2ithin the 4urisdiction of the re'ular courts.
0hat the statutes allo2ed the D(R(B to adopt its o2n rules of procedure does not per/it it 2ith
unbridled discretion to 'rant itself 4urisdiction ordinaril conferred onl b the Constitution or b
la2. Procedure, as distin'uished fro/ 4urisdiction, is the /eans b 2hich the po2er or authorit
of a court to hear and decide a class of cases is put into action. Rules of procedure are re/edial
in nature and not substantive. 0he cover onl rules on pleadin's and practice.
9"
Ahile the Court of (ppeals held that the D(R(B should not have participated in the
proceedin's before said court b filin' a co//ent in C()*.R. SP No. ++%#,, this Court
considers satisfactor the e3planation of the D(R(B that it has a peculiar interest in the final
outco/e of this case. (s D(R(B pointed out, 2hile it is onl an ad4unct of, it is at the sa/e ti/e
not totall independent fro/ it. 0he D(R(B is co/posed of the senior officials of the D(R,
2ho are 'uided b the State-s /ain polic in a'rarian refor/ 2hen resolvin' disputes before the
D(R(B. 0he D(R(B-s interest in the case is not purel le'al but also a /atter of 'overnanceF
thus, it cannot be strictl considered as a no/inal part 2hich /ust refrain fro/ ta&in' an active
part in the proceedin's.
12EREFORE, the instant petition is DENIED. No costs.
SO ORDERED.
Puno, 5Chair/an7, (ustria):artineG, Calle4o, Sr., and Chico)NaGario, ??., concur.