Title
Sarabia vs. Secretary of Agriculture and Natural Resources
Case
G.R. No. L-11107
Decision Date
Jul 25, 1958
Three applicants sought fishpond permits for the same land; the Secretary of Agriculture allocated equal shares after the Director of Fisheries' decision was appealed. The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal as untimely but upheld the equitable allocation.

Case Summary (G.R. No. L-11107)

Background and Facts of the Case

On August 27, 1951, Luis Sarabia submitted a fishpond application (Fp. A No. 7304) for approximately 100 hectares of land in Bo. Nagiba. Shortly after, on the same day, Jose Leido filed a similar application (Fp. A No. 7305) for the same area. A year later, on July 16, 1952, Francisco B. Lardizabal also filed a fishpond application (Fp. A No. 8777) for the identical parcel. At that time, the land in question was still a part of a communal forest and not available for fishpond purposes. It was only on February 27, 1953, that the said forest was disestablished, and subsequently, the area was certified by the Director of Fisheries as available for fishpond development on March 16, 1953.

Administrative Orders and Appeals

On March 29, 1954, the Director of Fisheries allocated the 100-hectare area between Sarabia and Leido, each receiving 50 hectares, while Lardizabal's application was rejected due to the prior claims by Sarabia and Leido. Lardizabal submitted a request for reconsideration of this rejection, which was denied on July 2, 1954. Sarabia and Leido received their fishpond permits, with Sarabia granted his permit on August 21, 1954, and Leido on September 10, 1954, both duly approved by the Secretary of Agriculture and Natural Resources.

In the meantime, on July 29, 1954, Lardizabal addressed a complaint to the Presidential Complaints and Action Committee (PCAC) regarding his application's rejection. This complaint was referred to the Secretary of Agriculture and Natural Resources, who interpreted it as an appeal from the Director's order, and thus issued a new order on August 22, 1955, modifying the previous allocation. This order reduced Sarabia's and Leido's permits to 33 1/3 hectares each and allocated the remaining 33 1/3 hectares to Lardizabal.

Court Proceedings and Jurisdictional Issues

Sarabia and Leido sought to challenge the Secretary's modification order through a petition for certiorari in the Court of First Instance of Manila, contending that the Secretary had overstepped his jurisdiction by modifying an order that had already become final. They argued that under Fisheries Administrative Order No. 22, the Director's original order—which rejected Lardizabal's application—should have become final after 30 days if not appealed to the Secretary.

However, Lardizabal filed a motion to dismiss the appeal, asserting that Sarabia and Leido failed to file their appeal within the prescribed timeframe. The trial court's examination of the notice of appeal and its timing revealed conflicting considerations regarding whether the appeal was perfected in compliance with the 15-day requirement set forth in Rule 41, Section 17 of the Rules of Court, as their notice was pr

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur is a legal research platform serving the Philippines with case digests and jurisprudence resources.