SC to DepEd: Vacate disputed Cagayan lot
The Supreme Court (SC) has ordered the Department of Education (DepEd) to vacate a lot it has occupied for decades in Cagayan, ruling that it does not have the permission of the rightful owner, who has a stronger legal claim on the land.
In a 15-page decision promulgated in April but made public only on Tuesday, the Second Division of the Supreme Court denied the petition for review filed by the DepEd. It also ordered the agency to vacate the parcel of land occupied by DepEd’s Solana Fresh Water Fishery School and to turn it over to respondent Princess Joama Caleda.
The ruling in G.R. No. 272507, penned by Senior Associate Justice Marvic Leonen, said a public institution can only prevent its eviction from a property devoted to public use, even without a title, if there is an implied acquiescence or acceptance—through a delay in the assertion of rights—on the owner’s part.
In this case, Caleda acted quickly when she immediately sent demand letters, communicated with the DepEd, registered her claims, and filed a case within two years of discovering the school’s occupation of the property.
The high tribunal, however, clarified that its findings were provisional and only referred to the recovery of the property’s possession.
“They do not, in any way, preclude the State from initiating an expropriation case in a separate proceeding,” it said.
Demand letters
The case stemmed from the complaint filed by Caleda in 2016 for recovery of possession with damages before the Municipal Circuit Trial Court of Solana, Cagayan.
She bought the 10,637-square-meter rice land in 2014 through an extrajudicial settlement of estate with waiver of rights and sale executed by the heirs of the registered owner, Bueno Gallebo.
But when she went to the property for a relocation survey, she discovered it had been occupied by the Solana Fresh Water Fishery School under the direct supervision of DepEd Cagayan.
Caleda wrote several demand letters for DepEd to vacate the lot, but to no avail.
She then filed a complaint in court to have the agency vacate the land and demolish the structures built on it.
In a 2020 decision, the trial court ruled in favor of Caleda and ordered the DepEd to vacate the lot. It said she had a greater right to occupy the lot after sufficiently proving her ownership through the extrajudicial settlement.
The trial court also found that the 1965 deed of sale presented by the DepEd as proof of ownership covered another property and not the disputed lot.
Eminent domain
The ruling was affirmed by the Court of Appeals, prompting the DepEd to file a petition for review before the high court.
Through the Office of the Solicitor General, the DepEd argued that public policy prohibits the ejectment of the government from a property already devoted to public use.
It also asserted that it may exercise the power of eminent domain to take over the property, and that Caleda’s only recourse was to seek just compensation.
The Supreme Court, however, ruled in favor of Caleda after finding no evidence that she or her predecessors had ceded the property in favor of DepEd.
In fact, the high court pointed out, the DepEd’s own evidence revealed that it bought a different lot under the deed of sale it presented.
It also noted that the DepEd had abandoned its initial defense in the lower courts of claiming ownership of the lot based on the deed of sale, only raising the argument of eminent domain for the first time before the high court.
“The petitioner cannot transform its appeal into an expropriation proceeding,” the Supreme Court said.
