Case Digest (G.R. No. 224457)
Case Digest (G.R. No. 224457)
Facts:
Aniban ng Nagkakaisang Mamamayan ng Hacienda Dolores (ANIBAN), Inc. v. FL Properties and Management Corporation and LLL Holdings, Inc., G.R. No. 224457 and G.R. No. 224965, January 23, 2023, Supreme Court Second Division, Leonen, SAJ., writing for the Court. Petitioners were ANIBAN (an association of farmers in Hacienda Dolores) and the Department of Agrarian Reform (DAR); respondents were FL Properties and Management Corporation and LLL Holdings, Inc., owners of contiguous parcels collectively referred to as Hacienda Dolores in Porac, Pampanga. The DAR Regional Office issued two exemption orders (October 24, 2005 and March 9, 2006) excluding the lands from CARP coverage on the grounds of slopes ≥18% and agricultural undevelopment; those exemption orders became final in 2006. Each Exemption Order expressly reserved the DAR’s right to withdraw, cancel or revoke the order in case of material misrepresentation.Five years after finality, on June 7, 2011, ANIBAN filed two “Renewed Petitions for Revocation/Recall/Withdrawal of Order of Exemption and Issuance of Notice of Coverage” (docketed as Administrative Case No. A-9999-03-CV-157-12). The DAR Central Office remanded the matter to the Regional Office, which formed a task force and initially dismissed ANIBAN’s amended petitions in an April 30, 2012 Order. ANIBAN moved for reconsideration; the Regional Office thereafter partially modified its prior disposition in an August 23, 2012 Order, finding portions of the properties to be below 18% slope and agriculturally developed, and lifting exemptions over those portions while maintaining exemptions over the rest. FL Properties and LLL Holdings sought reconsideration and appealed administratively and judicially through multiple petitions.
Procedurally, FL Properties and LLL Holdings filed a certiorari petition (CA-G.R. SP No. 127228) which the Court of Appeals dismissed for wrong mode of appeal. Subsequently, after the DAR’s Undersecretary for Legal Affairs issued an interlocutory order on February 26, 2015 directing clarificatory hearings and ocular inspection (and related March 31, 2015 and April 10, 2015 directives), FL Properties and LLL Holdings filed another certiorari petition directly with the Court of Appeals (CA-G.R. SP No. 139472). The Court of Appeals, by its October 16, 2015 Decision, granted that petition, dismissed ANIBAN’s amended petitions for coverage, and permanently enjoined the DAR from proceeding with Administrative Case No. A-9999-03-CV-157-12; an April 28, 2016 Resolution denied motions for reconsideration. ANIBAN and the DAR separately filed petitions for review on certiorari (Rule 45) with the Supreme Court, which consolidated the cases.
Issues:
- Is the Department of Agrarian Reform a real party in interest in these consolidated petitions?
- May the Department of Agrarian Reform be represented only by the Office of the Solicitor General?
- Was the direct filing of a petition for certiorari by FL Properties and LLL Holdings with the Court of Appeals proper without first filing a motion for reconsideration and exhausting administrative remedies?
- Did FL Properties and LLL Holdings commit forum shopping?
- Are the October 24, 2005 exemption orders final and immutable such that the DAR could not partially revoke them?
- Did the DAR commit grave abuse of discretion in issuing the February 26, 2015 Interlocutory Order?
- Was the Court of Appeals’ issuance of a permanent injunction against the DAR proper?
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)