Title
Pascual vs. Secretary of Public Works and Communications
Case
G.R. No. L-10405
Decision Date
Dec 29, 1960
A provincial governor challenged the constitutionality of a law appropriating funds for private roads, arguing it served a private purpose. The Supreme Court ruled the appropriation unconstitutional, as public funds cannot benefit private interests, and upheld the petitioner's standing as a taxpayer.

Case Digest (G.R. No. L-10405)
Expanded Legal Reasoning Model

Facts:

  • Petition and subject matter
    • On August 31, 1954, Governor Wenceslao Pascual filed an action for declaratory relief and preliminary injunction to annul the P85,000 appropriation in Republic Act No. 920, Sec. 1-C(a)(43 h), for “Pasig feeder road terminals.”
    • The funds were earmarked “for the construction, reconstruction, repair, extension and improvement” of feeder roads alleged to connect various barrios to Highway 54.
  • Ownership and donation events
    • The “feeder roads” were unbuilt subdivision streets within the privately owned Antonio Subdivision in Pasig, Rizal, property of Senator José C. Zulueta at the time RA 920 was enacted.
    • Zulueta offered the roads to Pasig municipality (accepted conditionally), then on December 12, 1953 executed a deed of donation to the Republic—accepted by the Executive Secretary—subject to an onerous reversionary condition.
  • Proceedings below
    • Respondents moved to dismiss, arguing: the Governor lacked capacity (the Provincial Fiscal should sue); no cause of action; the appropriation was lawful; the donation was a pure gift, not a prohibited contract.
    • The Court of First Instance dismissed the petition, dissolved the injunction, upheld the appropriation as public, deemed the donation a forbidden contract but held the Governor had no direct interest to challenge it.

Issues:

  • Whether the P85,000 appropriation in RA 920 for construction of private subdivision roads violated the constitutional requirement that public funds be used only for a public purpose.
  • Whether Zulueta’s post-enactment donation—made while a Senator and subject to reversion—cured any constitutional defect or itself amounted to a prohibited contract.
  • Whether Governor Pascual, as a taxpayer and provincial representative, had legal capacity/standing to challenge the constitutionality of the appropriation and to enjoin disbursement.

Ruling:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Ratio:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Doctrine:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster—building context before diving into full texts.