AGRARIAN LAW

AND SOCIAL
LEGISLATION
Title: Alangilan Realy vs. OTP GR No. 180471
Date:
Ponente:
Division:
FACTS
Petitioner (Alangilan Realty & Dev. Corp.) is the owner/developer of a 17.4892 Hec. Land in Brgy. Alangilan and
Patay in Batangas City (Alangilan landholding). On Aug. 7, 1996, it filed an Application and/or Petition for
Exclusion/Exemption from Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program (CARP) Coverage with Municipal Agrarian
Reform Office (MARO) of the Dept. of Agrarian Reform (DAR). It alleges that the subject landholding was reserved
for residential under Zoning Ordinance (1982 Ordinance) thus it is not subject to CARP.

ISSUE/S
WON the landholdings are under the jurisdiction of CARP.
HELD
Yes. The subject landholding, classified by the Batangas City Zoning Ordinance of 1982 as Agricultural / Reserved
for Residential, was not reclassified from agricultural to non-agricultural land thus it is still under the jurisdiction for
CARP / CARL. The term reserved for residential simply reflect the intended use of land that it may be used for future
residential purposes and was not reclassified as residential as the phrase reserved for residential is not a land
classification category.

Ocular inspection of MARO, PARO (Provincial Agrarian Reform Office) and RARO (Regional Agrarian
Reform Office) showed that the land was still in use for agricultural purposes and was planted with mangoes and
coconuts at the time of the filing of application for exemption. Petitioner failed to show that the land was already in
residential use even before June 15, 1988 (effectivity of CARL). Not having converted or reclassified as residential
before June 15, 1988, the land is still classified as Agricultural and subsequent reclassification as residential-1 in 1994
cannot place the property outside the ambit of CARP as there was no showing that the DAR Secretary approved such
reclassification.