G.R. No. L-17240 January 31,
1962
FACTS
This
case involves the application and interpretation of Republic Act. No. 2056,
entitled "An Act to prohibit, remove and/or demolish the construction of
dams, dikes or any works in public navigable waters or waterways and in communal
fishing grounds, to regulate works in such waters or waterways and in communal
fishing grounds, and to provide penalties for its violation, and for other
purposes.
On
August 15, 1958, Senator Rogelio de la Rosa complained with the Secretary of Public
Works and Communications against several fishpond owners in Macabebe, Pampanga,
among whom is petitioner herein Clemencia B. Vda. de Villongco. The complaint
charges that petitioner has appropriated a portion of the coastal waters of
Pampanga, locally known as "Pantion", converting portions of the
coastal areas into fishponds. Investigations were conducted under the authority
of the Secretary.
It
was found that the conversion of this area into a fishpond by the petitioner
deprived complainants of the uses of the area as a fishing ground and for navigation.
The petitioners contend that this area is owned by them as shown by the title. A
relocation survey, based on the title, was made to determine whether the
fishpond constructions and/or works of the petitioner are within the titled
property. Said survey shows that a portion of Manila Bay was included as part
of the fishpond. Thereafter, the petitioner
insists that the
area being covered by a Torrens Certificate of Title, the title thereon is
indefeasible and imprescriptible.
Petitioner
herein filed suit in the Court of First Instance of Rizal which rendered a
decision declaring that the Secretary of Public Works and Communications was in
error in ordering the demolition of the dikes and other constructions of the
petitioner Vda. de Villongco on the ground that said portion falls under the
exception of Section 2 of Republic Act No. 2056, because it does not interfere
with navigation and does not produce inundation and the dikes were constructed
before the area was a fishing ground.
The
respondent Secretary has appealed from the decision.
ISSUE
Whether
the Secretary of Public Works and Communications was correct in ordering for
the removal of the dikes constructed by the petitioner herewith.
RULING
Yes.
The provisions of RA 2056 disclose that the authority granted the Secretary of
Public Works and Communications is to declare that the construction or building
of dams, dikes or any other works encroaching on navigable rivers, streams, or
any other navigable public waters or waterways is prohibited and to order their
removal or demolition.
The
area included in the dikes of the petitioner was not a part of the land titled
in the name of the petitioner, as shown by the fact that the titled land is
clearly a portion of the Manila Bay area or coastal area.
Therefore, it is a public property, not susceptible to appropriation by
any private individual, not only because it belongs to the State but also
because it is used as a waterway.
Comments
Post a Comment