G.R. No. 138823 - Magkalas vs. National Housing Authority

The petitioner, Caridad Magkalas, and her predecessors-in-interest had been occupying a lot designated as TAG-77-0063, Block 1, Barangay 132, Bagong Barrio, Caloocan City for 39 years.
On March 26, 1978, Presidential Decree (P.D.) No. 1315 was issued which expropriated certain lots in Bagong Barrio and named the National Housing Authority (NHA) as the administrator of the redevelopment project. This decree empowered the NHA to take possession, control, and disposition of the expropriated properties including the power to demolish improvements.

During a census survey of the area, the petitioner’s structure was assigned TAG No. 0063.
The NHA, after conducting studies, determined that the area where the petitioner’s structure was located should be classified as an Area Center—designated as open space in compliance with the 30% open space requirement in residential developments.
In August 1985, the petitioner received a Notice of Lot Assignment from the NHA which recognized her as a censused owner and informed her that she was being allocated Lot 77, Block 2, Barangay 132 for relocation.

The petitioner, together with other affected homeowners, initially filed a complaint for damages and a request for a temporary restraining order (TRO) and writ of preliminary injunction against the NHA when directed to vacate the premises and dismantle her structure.
The Regional Trial Court (RTC) dismissed her complaint in Civil Case No. C-12102, directing the parties to exhaust available administrative remedies.
Subsequent communications followed:

A letter from the NHA in March 1994 reiterated the relocation directive and clarified that no judicial order was necessary under P.D. No. 1472.
Despite a TRO being issued on March 25, 1994, the petition for a writ of preliminary injunction was ultimately denied on April 14, 1994.

The petitioner appealed the developments through various proceedings, including a Petition for Certiorari to the Court of Appeals and a Petition for Review on Certiorari to the Supreme Court.

Several pre-trial conferences were scheduled between January and April 1996, culminating in an agreement by the parties to decide the case based on submitted memoranda on the sole issue of the legality of the NHA’s power to relocate and demolish the petitioner’s structure.
The trial court, after reviewing the memoranda, issued its decision on March 10, 1999, dismissing the petitioner’s complaint. A subsequent motion for reconsideration was denied on May 14, 1999.

P.D. No. 1315 clearly vests the NHA with the power to take immediate possession and to demolish improvements on expropriated properties in Bagong Barrio, thereby facilitating the redevelopment and addressing urban blight.
P.D. No. 1472 further reinforces NHA’s authority by granting it the power to summarily eject squatters and illegal occupants without a judicial order.
The petitioner’s claim of a vested right—based on long occupancy and the issuance of a tag number—is countered by the fact that such tagging merely conferred a contingent or expectant right, not an absolute legal title, especially when statutory re-allocation was contemplated.

Whether the demolition or relocation of the petitioner’s structure violates her vested rights over the acquired property under the Social Justice Clause of the Constitution.
Whether Republic Act (R.A.) No. 7279, the Urban Development and Housing Act of 1992, impliedly repealed P.D. No. 1315 and P.D. No. 1472, thereby affecting the NHA’s authority to order eviction and demolition without a judicial order.