Case Digest (G.R. No. L-34915)
Facts:
City Government of Quezon City and City Council of Quezon City v. Hon. Judge Vicente G. Ericta as Judge of the Court of First Instance of Rizal, Quezon City, Branch XVIII; Himlayang Pilipino, Inc., G.R. No. L-34915. June 24, 1983. Supreme Court First Division. Gutierrez, Jr., J., writing for the Court.The case stems from Ordinance No. 6118, S-64 of Quezon City, whose Section 9 provided that "At least six (6) percent of the total area of the memorial park cemetery shall be set aside for charity burial of deceased persons who are paupers and have been residents of Quezon City for at least 5 years prior to their death, to be determined by competent City Authorities…" For several years Section 9 was not enforced; seven years after enactment the Quezon City Council adopted a resolution requesting the City Engineer to stop selling memorial park lots where owners had failed to donate the required 6% space. Pursuant thereto, the City Engineer notified Himlayang Pilipino, Inc. that Section 9 would be enforced.
Himlayang Pilipino filed a petition for declaratory relief, prohibition and mandamus with preliminary injunction in the Court of First Instance of Rizal (Branch XVIII, Quezon City) (Sp. Proc. No. Q-16002) seeking to annul Section 9 on the ground that it contravened the Constitution, the Quezon City Charter (R.A. 537), the Local Autonomy Act and the Revised Administrative Code, and that it amounted to an uncompensated taking/confiscation of private property.
Because the issues were purely legal, the parties agreed to judgment on the pleadings. The Court of First Instance declared Section 9 null and void, holding that it was not a valid exercise of police power but an outright confiscation without compensation and therefore violative of due process. A motion for reconsideration was denied. The City Government and City Council then filed the present petition for review to the Supreme Court seeking reversal of the CFI decision.
Before the Supreme Court the petitioners argued that Section 9 was a valid and reasonable exercise of the city's police power and promoted public use (charity burial for paupers), relying on the municipal charter's general welfare/police-power grant. Responden...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Is Section 9 of Ordinance No. 6118, S-64 a valid exercise of the police power of Quezon City?
- Does Section 9 effect an uncompensated taking/expropriation beyond the city's authority under R.A. 537, Sec. 12(t) and the general-welfare/poli...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)