Prepared by: Obligado
Wenceslao Pascual | VS. | The Secretary of Public Works and Communications, Et al.
PETITIONER: Wenceslao Pascual, Provincial Governor of Rizal
RESPONDENTS: Secretary of Public Works and Communications, Et. Al
SUMMARY: Governor Pascual petitioned that the contested item of Republic
Act No. 920 be declared null and void; that the alleged deed of donation of the
feeder roads in question be "declared unconstitutional and, therefor, illegal"; that
a writ of injunction be issued enjoining the respondents. The respondents'
contention is that there is public purpose because people living in the subdivision
will directly be benefitted from the construction of the roads, and the government
also gains from the donation of the land supposed to be occupied by the streets,
made by its owner to the government.
DOCTRINE: Corpus Juris Secundum: Taxing power must be exercised for public
purposes only and not for the advantage of private individuals. The test of the
constitutionality of a statute requiring the use of public funds is whether the statute
is designed to promote the public interest.
FACTS:
1. On May 1953, respondent Zulueta, addressed a letter to the Municipal
Council of Pasig, Rizal, offering to donate projected feeder roads to the
municipality of Pasig, Rizal.
2. On 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"; that no deed of donation in favor of the
municipality of Pasig was, however, executed.
3. On 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" that inasmuch as the projected
feeder roads in question were private property at the time of the passage and
approval of Republic Act No. 920.
4. On August 31, 1954, petitioner Wenceslao Pascual, as Provincial Governor
of Rizal, instituted a declaratory relief, with injunction, upon the ground that
RA 920, which apropriates funds for public works particularly for the
construction and improvement of Pasig feeder road terminals.
5. The aforementioned feeder roads were “nothing but projected and planned
subdivision roads, not yet constructed within the Antonio Subdivision,
belonging to private respondent Zulueta, situated at Pasig, Rizal; and which
projected feeder roads do not connect any government property or any
important premises to the main highway.
6. The respondents contend that the construction of the roads will benefit not
only the public but also the local government given that this was a donation.
ISSUES:
1. Whether or not the appropriation to be used in the construction should be
considered for the benefit of public purpose in order to justify the government
expenditure.
RULING:
The decision appealed from is hereby reversed, and the records are remanded to the
lower court for further proceedings, with the costs of this instance against respondent
Jose C. Zulueta.
It is a general rule that the legislature is without power to appropriate public revenue
for anything but a public purpose. It is the essential character of the direct object of
the expenditure which must determine its validity as justifying a tax, and not the
magnitude of the interest to be affected nor the degree to which the general advantage
of the community, and thus the public welfare, may be ultimately benefited by their
promotion. Incidental to the public or to the state, which results from the promotion of
private interest and the prosperity of private enterprises or business, does not justify
their aid by the use public money.
The test of the constitutionality of a statute requiring the use of public funds is whether
the statute is designed to promote the public interest, as opposed to the furtherance of
the advantage of individuals, although each advantage to individuals might
incidentally serve the public.