G.R. NO. 170823 - DEPARTMENT OF AGRARIAN REFORM, REP. BY OIC-SECRETARY NASSER C. PANGANDAMAN, VS. OROVILLE DEVELOPMENT CORP., REP. BY ANTONIO H. TIU AND WALDO G. REBOLOS.D E C I S I O N - Supreme Court E-Library

Ruling

WHEREFORE, premises considered, Order is hereby issued DENYING the exemption application and DECLARING that the 48.8939 hectare agricultural land embraced by TCT numbers [sic] T-85121, T-85135, and T-104365 located at Maitum, Upper Puerto, Cagayan de Oro City as COVERED by the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law (CARP). Petitioner failed in its move to reconsider the said May 25, 1998 Order, as shown in the Order issued by DAR Secretary Hernani A. Braganza on June 20, 2002, which decreed: WHEREFORE, premises considered, the Motion for Reconsideration dated 10 June 1998 filed by applicant-movant Oroville Development Corporation, is hereby DENIED for lack of merit. The Order of the Secretary dated 25 May 1998 is hereby AFFIRMED in toto. Unfazed, petitioner elevated the DAR Orders to the Office of the President (OP). However, the OP rendered a Decision on June 27, 2003, as follows: WHEREFORE, premises considered, the questioned Orders dated 25 May 1998 and 20 June 2002 of the DAR Secretary are hereby AFFIRMED and the instant appeal DISMISSED. Petitioner's motion for reconsideration was denied by the OP in its Resolution dated December 9, 2003. [3] On petition for review under Rule 43 of the Rules of Court, the Court of Appeals was faced with the issue of whether the subject property is classified as agricultural as found by the DAR Secretary and affirmed by the Office of the President, or residential as alleged by respondent Oroville Development Corporation (Oroville). The appellate court initially declared in its Decision [4] dated March 16, 2005 that the subject property is agricultural on the basis of a later certification to this effect dated February 10, 1997 issued by the City Development Coordinator of the City Planning and Development Office which superseded the Certification dated November 22, 1993 issued by the same authority. Upon Oroville's motion for reconsideration, however, the Court of Appeals set aside its earlier Decision and ruled that the subject property has been reclassified as residential and therefore beyond the coverage of CARP. This time, the appellate court gave credence to three (3) Zoning Certifications dated July 23, 2004 issued by the Assistant City Development Coordinator of the City Planning and Development Office to the effect that the subject property is within the city's potential growth areas for urban expansion. According to the Court of Appeals, these certifications were not considered by the court in the resolution of Oroville's petition because they were not yet in existence when the petition was filed on February 24, 2004. The Court of Appeals denied reconsideration. In its Petition for Review [5] dated January 9, 2006, the DAR seeks the reversal of the appellate court's Amended Decision, arguing that the latter precipitately relied on the Zoning Certifications issued by the City Planning and Development Office and erroneously assumed that a local government unit such as Cagayan de Oro City has unconditional a