- CASE DIGEST -
SUBJECT: LAW ON PUBLIC CORPORATION
MUNICIPAL OF JIMENEZ VS. BAZ
G.R. No. 105746
December 2, 1996
Topic: Power to Alter Boundaries of
LGUs; De Facto Municipal Corporation
FACTS: The Municipality of Sinacaban was created by
E.O. 258 by then Pres. Elpidio Quirino, pursuant to Sec. 68 of the Revised
Administrative Code of 1917.
By virtue of Municipal Council Resolution No. 171,
Sinacaban laid claim to a portion of Barrio Tabo-o and to Barrios Macabayao,
Adorable, Sinara, Baja, and Sinara Alto, based on the technical dedcription in
E.O. No. 258. The claim was filed with the Provincial Board of Misamis
Occidental against the Municipality of Jimenez. While conceding that the
disputed area is part of Sinacaban, the Municipality of Jimenez, in its answer,
nonetheless asserted jurisdiction on the basis of an agreement it had with the
Municipality of Sinacaban. This agreement, which was approved by the Provincial
Board of Misamis Occidental in its Resolution No. 77 dated February 18, 1950,
fixed the common boundary of Sinacaban and Jimenez, upon which provided that
barrios Macabayao, Sitio Adorable and site as part of Jimenez.
On October 11, 1989, the Provincial Board declared
the disputed area to be part of Sinacaban.
Municipality of Jiminez filed a petition for
certiorari, prohibition, and mandamus against Sinacaban, the Province of
Misamis Occidental and its Provincial Board, contending that Sinacaban has no
legal personality as municipal corporation being created only by an E.O following
the rule in Pelaez vs. Auditor General that the creation of municipal corporations
is essentially a legislative matter and therefore the President was without
power to create by executive order the Municipality of Sinacaban.
ISSUES:
1. WON the Provincial Board had power to alter the
boundaries of Sinacaban as fixed in E.O. 258.
No. The resolution approving the agreement between
the municipalities was void because the Board had no power to alter the
boundaries as fixed in E.O. 258. Power of provincial boards to settle boundary
disputes is "of an administrative nature.” Thus it is limited to
implementing the law, and not amending it. If any alterations of boundaries
were made, Resolution 77 cannot be said to be merely administrative, nor valid.
In gist, if Resolution 77 is contrary to the technical description of the
territory of Sinacaban, it cannot be used by Jimenez as basis for opposing the
claim.
2. WON the Municipality of Sinacaban has
personality of a de facto corporation.
Yes. Sinacaban legally exists as
a de facto municipal corporation.
Although the creation of municipal corporations is essentially a
legislative matter, the court has
since held that where a municipality created as such by executive order is
later impliedly recognized, its creation can no longer be questioned (Municipality
of San Narciso, Quezon v. Mendez). A municipality has been conferred the
status of at least a de facto municipal corporation where its legal existence
has been recognized and acquiesced publicly and officially.
Sinacaban is a de facto
corporation since it had completely organized itself even prior to the Pelaez
case and exercised corporate powers for forty (40) years before the existence
was questioned. The State and even the Municipality of Jimenez
itself has recognized Sinacaban’s corporate existence. Under the Judiciary
Reorganization Act of 1980, Sinacaban is constituted part of a municipal
circuit for purposes of the establishment of MTCs in the country. Moreover, the
Ordinance appended to the 1987 Constitution, apportioning legislative districts
throughout the country, considered Sinacaban part of the Second District of
Misamis Occidental. Likewise, Municipality of Jimenez had earlier recognized
Sinacaban in 1950 by entering into an agreement with it regarding their common
boundary.
But by the creation of the
Local Government Code, Municipality of Sinacaban attained a de jure status. Sinacaban’s
legal existence has been cured by Sec 442(d) of the LGC, which provides:
“Municipalities
existing as of the date of the effectivity of this Code shall continue to exist
and operate as such. Existing municipal districts organized pursuant to
presidential issuances/executive orders and which have their respective set of
municipal officials holding office at the time of the effectivity of this Code
shall henceforth be regular municipalities”
Indeed, Sec. 442(d) of the LGC is deemed to have
cured whatever doubts there may have been as to the legal existence to
Sinacaban.
Click Here: To View Full Text of the Case
No comments:
Post a Comment