G.R. No. 235619 , July 13, 2020
Philippine Navy Golf Club, Inc., The Philippine Navy and The Philippine Navy Flag Officer-in-Command, Petitioners, v. Merardo C. Abaya, Angelito P. Maglonzo, Ruben I. Follosco and Elias B. Sta. Clara, Respondents.

FACTS

In 1957, President Carlos Garcia established the Fort Andres Bonifacio Military Reservation. In 1965, President Diosdado Macapagal issued Proclamation No. 461, which excluded portions of the reservation and declared them the AFP Officer’s Village, to be disposed of under relevant public land laws, but with an exclusionary clause stating that parts used or earmarked for public or quasi-public purposes shall be excluded from disposition. In 1976, the Philippine Navy developed a part of the village into a golf course managed by the Philippine Navy Golf Club, Inc. Later, the DENR awarded lots within the AFP Officer’s Village to retired military officers, the respondents Merardo Abaya, Angelito Maglonzo, Ruben Follosco, and Elias Sta. Clara. However, the respondents were unable to occupy and improve their awarded lots because the petitioners (the Philippine Navy and the Golf Club) were already occupying the lands. The respondents filed an accion reinvindicatoria before the RTC to recover possession. The petitioners defended by invoking the exclusionary clause in Proclamation No. 461, claiming the golf course land was for public/quasi-public use and thus not alienable, and raised the doctrine of non-suability of the state. The RTC ruled in favor of the respondents, ordering the petitioners to turn over the lots and pay rental fees. The CA affirmed the RTC decision with modification on the interest rate. The petitioners elevated the case to the Supreme Court.

ISSUE

Whether the land developed into a golf course within the AFP Officer’s Village is excluded from disposition as alienable public land under the exclusionary clause of Proclamation No. 461 for being used or earmarked for public or quasi-public purposes.

RULING

The Supreme Court denied the petition and affirmed the CA decision. The land remains part of the alienable and disposable public land of the AFP Officer’s Village. The exclusionary clause in Proclamation No. 461 applies only to areas being used or earmarked for public or quasi-public purposes at the time of the proclamation in 1965. The golf course did not exist in 1965; it was developed only in 1976. No subsequent proclamation or law earmarked the land for the golf course’s construction. The unilateral development by the Philippine Navy did not reclassify the land. The exclusionary clause cannot be invoked. The Court also held that the accion reinvindicatoria was not the proper forum to challenge the validity of the DENR’s orders of award; such objections should be raised through the proper administrative or judicial reversion proceedings. The doctrine of non-suability was not a bar because the suit was aimed at compelling the petitioners to vacate property they unlawfully possessed, and the state’s act of entering into the management of a golf course was proprietary, not governmental. The award of rental compensation was upheld as a reasonable consequence of the petitioners’ unlawful possession.