Sta. Rosa Development Corp. vs. Court of Appeals, et.
al
G.R No. 112526
October 12, 2001
FACTS:
The case is a petition regarding Department of Agrarian Reform Adjudication Board’s (DARAB) order of
compulsory acquisition of petitioner’s property under the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program
(CARP).
Petitioner Sta. Rosa Development Corporation (SRRDC), was the registered owner of two parcel of land
situated at Brgy. Casile, Cabuyao, Laguna. According to them, these lands are watersheds which provide
clean and potable (drinkable) water to the Canlubang community and that 90 light industries are located
in that area.
They were alleging respondents usurped its rights over their property thereby destroying the ecosystem.
Since the said land provides water to the residents, respondents sought an easement of a right of a way
to and from Barangay Castile, to which, by counterclaim, Sta. Rosa sought ejectment against respondents.
Respondents went to the DAR and filed a case for compulsory acquisition of the Sta. Rosa Property under
the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program.
Compulsory acquisition is the power of the government to acquire private rights in land without the
willing consent of its owner or occupant in order to benefit the society.
The said land was inspected by the Municipal and Agrarian Reform Officer, and upon consensus of the
authorities concerned, they decided that the said land must be placed under compulsory acquisition.
Petitioners filed an objection on the ground that:
The area is not appropriate for agricultural purposes.
The area was rugged in terrain with slopes 18% and above. (which falls under the exception in
compulsory acquisition of CARP)
The occupants of the land were illegal settlers or (squatters) who by no means are entitled to the
land as beneficiaries.
Another issue raised by the petitioners was that the DAR failed to follow the due process because instead
of paying just compensation, a trust account was made in favor of the petitioners.
ISSUE:
Whether or not the property in question is covered by CARP despite the fact that the entire
property formed part of a watershed area prior to the enactment of R.A No. 6657
Whether the petition of land conversion of the parcels of land may be granted?
HELD:
Watershed is one of those enumerated by CARP to be exempt from its coverage. We cannot
ignore the fact that the disputed parcel of land form a vital part of an area that need to be
protected for watershed purposes. The protection of watersheds ensure an adequate supply of
water for future generations and the control of flashfloods that not only damage property but
cause loss of lives.
