Case Digest (G.R. No. 188296)
Facts:
Barangay Captain Beda Torrecampo v. Metropolitan Waterworks and Sewerage System, G.R. No. 188296, April 16, 2012, Supreme Court Second Division, Carpio, J., writing for the Court.
Petitioner Barangay Captain Beda Torrecampo, in his capacity as taxpayer and on behalf of his barangay constituents and allegedly eight million Metro Manila residents, filed on 1 July 2009 a petition for injunction with prayer for a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) and Writ of Preliminary Injunction against respondents Metropolitan Waterworks and Sewerage System (MWSS) and its Administrator Diosdado Jose M. Allado, and the Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH) and its Secretary Hermogenes Ebdane. Torrecampo sought to enjoin implementation of the Circumferential Road 5 (C-5) Extension Project along the Tandang Sora section affecting MWSS-owned Lot Nos. 42-B-2-A, 42-A-6 and 42-A-4, alleging the project would endanger three MWSS aqueducts that convey raw water from La Mesa Dam to the Balara Filtration Plant and thereby imperil potable water supply for Metro Manila.
On 1 July 2009 the Court issued a status quo order effective that day and required respondents to comment. The Court set an ex parte TRO/preliminary injunction hearing on 6 July 2009. At the hearing, petitioner argued, invoking Republic Act No. 8975, that only the Supreme Court may enjoin government infrastructure projects; counsel for DPWH and MWSS (via the Office of the Government Corporate Counsel) countered that the petition was premature, that there was no justiciable controversy because DPWH was then conducting studies and no construction design had been submitted to MWSS for review, and that the action involved executive policy and technical determinations best left to the DPWH and other Executive agencies. After hearing, the Court required memoranda and lifted the status quo order, concluding no grave injustice or irreparable injury had been shown at that stage.
The record shows relevant antecedents: Presidential Proclamation No. 1395 (25 September 2007) reserving the RIPADA area for C-5 access highway and housing; correspondence among MMDA, MWSS and the Office of the President (2007–2008) concerning segregation of MWSS lots for relocation and MRBs; a MWSS Board resolution of 19 June 2008 opposing segregation of certain MWSS parcels; and MWSS Board Resolution No. 2009-052 (12 March 2009) allowing DPWH to use the 60-meter right-of-way for preliminary studies, subject to prior management review of road design and an opinion of the OGCC. DPWH entered the MWSS properties on 30 June 2009 to conduct test pitting and geotechnical profiling for detailed design work. In their memoranda and oral arguments the parties disputed whether the RIPADA alignment or the Tandang Sora alignment was preferable, whether the aqueducts would be endangered, and whether petitioner had standing or had exhausted administrative remedies.
Petitioner filed the action dir...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Is petitioner entitled to an injunction enjoining respondents from implementing the C-5 Road Extension Project along the Tandang Sora section affecting MWSS properties — i.e., does the petition present a justiciable controversy warranting injunctive relief under R.A. 8975 and the Court’s jurisdiction?
- Did petitioner establish grave abuse of discretion by respondents that would justify the exercise of the Court’s extraordinary c...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)