G.R. No.

L-10405
December 29, 1960

WENCESLAO PASCUAL, in his official capacity as Provincial Governor of Rizal

petitioner-appellant,
vs
THE SECRETARY OF PUBLIC WORKS AND COMMUNICATIONS, ET AL .
respondents-appellees

FACTS: (In chronological order)

 May 1953 - Respondent Jose C. Zulueta (member of the Senate of the Philippines), addressed a letter
to the Municipal Council of Pasig, Rizal, offering to donate Pasig feeder road terminals to the
municipality of Pasig, Rizal.

 June 13, 1953 - The offer was accepted by the council, subject to the condition that the donor would
submit a plan of the said roads and agree to change the names of two of them, however, there is no
deed of donation in favor of the municipality of Pasig was executed.

 June 20, 1953 - Republic Act No. 920, entitled "An Act Appropriating Funds for Public Works" was
approved containing an item of P85,000.00 for the construction, reconstruction, repair, extension and
improvement" of Pasig feeder road terminals.

 July 10, 1953 - Respondent Zulueta wrote another letter to said council, calling attention to the
approval of Republic Act. No. 920, and the sum of P85,000.00 appropriated therein for the construction
of the projected feeder roads in question; that the municipal council of Pasig endorsed said letter of
respondent Zulueta to the District Engineer of Rizal, who, up to the present "has not made any
endorsement thereon.

 December 12, 1953 - Respondent Zulueta executed an alleged deed of donation in order to give a
semblance of legality.

** Petitioner, Wenceslao Pascual prayedthat said donation violated the provision of our fundamental law
prohibiting members of Congress from being directly or indirectly financially interested in any contract with the
Government, and RA No. 920, hence, is unconstitutional, as well as null and void ab initio, for the construction
of the projected feeder roads in question with public funds would greatly enhance or increase the value of the
aforementioned subdivision of respondent Zulueta and will relieve him from the burden of constructing his
subdivision streets or roads at his own expense.

**Respondents moved to dismiss the petition on the ground that the requisites of questioning the
constitutionality of the said act is incomplete.

ISSUE:
Whether or not Republic Act No. 920 is valid and does not contravene the Constitution in requiring the
use of public funds.

HELD:
The application of said Republic Act No. 920 to Pasig Road feeder is null and void.
Court ordered a writ of preliminary injunction in favor of the petitioner, and circumstances surrounding this
case sufficiently justify petitioners action in contesting the appropriation and donation in question.