Title
Supreme Court
Vda. de Nazareno vs. Court of Appeals
Case
G.R. No. 98045
Decision Date
Jun 26, 1996
A land dispute over man-made accretion from sawdust dumping; petitioners failed to exhaust administrative remedies, and the Supreme Court ruled the land as public, affirming the Bureau of Lands' jurisdiction and findings.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 98045)

Administrative Proceedings Before the Bureau of Lands

Antonio applied for a survey plan (Csd-106-00571) to perfect title over the accretion area. Private respondents protested. Land Investigator Labis reported that the area comprised creek bed and swampy riverbank occupied by concrete structures and nipa palm. Regional Director Hilario ordered segregation of areas occupied by private respondents and directed them to file public land applications. Antonio’s motion for reconsideration to Undersecretary Ignacio (acting as Officer-in-Charge) was denied. Director Palad ordered vacatur of private-occupied portions and possession by private respondents.

Jurisdictional Issue: Exhaustion of Administrative Remedies

The RTC dismissed petitioners’ annulment suit for failure to exhaust administrative remedies. The Court of Appeals affirmed, holding that appeal must lie directly to the Secretary of Agriculture and Natural Resources under CA 141, not to an Officer-in-Charge. Petitioners argued that Ignacio, as Undersecretary, had proper authority to decide the motion for reconsideration, thereby satisfying exhaustion.

Nature of the Accretion and Public Domain Classification

Petitioners claimed private ownership of the accretion under Art. 457 Civil Code (alluvion). The Court held that:

  1. The material forming the land resulted from deliberate human dumping of sawdust and fill, not gradual natural deposition by water current;
  2. Artificial accretions are part of the public domain (Tiongco v. Director of Lands);
  3. Petitioners’ filing of a public land application constituted admission of public land status; and
  4. Administrative findings on fact by the Bureau, affirmed by the Court of Appeals, are conclusive.

Authority over Public Lands and Proper Appeal

Under CA 141 §§ 3–4, the Secretary of Agriculture and Natural Resources, through the Director of Lands, exercises exclusive control over classification and disposition of public lands; factual determinations are conclusive once approved. The Undersecretary acting on behalf of the Secretary validly denied reconsideration. Petitioners thus exhausted administrative remedies.

Execution Order by the Director of Lands

Director Palad’s order to vacate and segregate the titled lot did not alter Hilario’s decision but implemented it. Private respondents, as

    ...continue reading

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