G.R. No. L-27971 October 16, 1970
TAN TY, petitioner-appellant, vs. LAND TENURE ADMINISTRATION (defunct) now LAND AUTHORITY, EXECUTIVE SECRETARY, OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT OF THE PHILIPPINES, respondents-appellees.

FACTS

The petitioner-appellant, Tan Ty, a Chinese citizen, applied to the Land Tenure Administration (now Land Authority) to lease four lots (Nos. 19, 20, 21, and 24, Block No. 3) of the Fable Estate in Paco, Manila. This estate was purchased by the government in 1955 under Republic Act 1162, as amended, for subdivision and resale to bona fide tenants, occupants, and other qualified persons. Tan Ty claimed she was a tenant of the lots prior to the government’s acquisition. The Land Tenure Administration denied her application because it was filed on October 21, 1957, after the lots had already been allocated to other parties. The denial was also based on the ground that the privilege to lease under the law is available only to tenants or occupants who are qualified to purchase but are financially incapable at the time, and Tan Ty, as an alien, was not qualified to purchase land. The Office of the President affirmed this denial. Tan Ty then filed a certiorari proceeding in the Court of First Instance of Manila, alleging grave abuse of discretion and deprivation of property rights without due process. The lower court ruled against her, holding that as a Chinese citizen disqualified from purchasing land, she was also disqualified from leasing it under the law. Her motion for reconsideration was denied, prompting this appeal.

ISSUE

Whether a non-Filipino citizen (specifically, a Chinese citizen) is qualified to lease land expropriated by the Government under Republic Act 1162, as amended, for resale to bona fide tenants and occupants and other qualified persons.

RULING

No. The Supreme Court affirmed the decision of the lower court, holding that Tan Ty, as a Chinese citizen, is not qualified to lease the expropriated lots. The Court ruled that the lease provision in Section 3 of Republic Act 1162, as amended, is available only to individuals who are qualified to purchase the land but are temporarily financially incapable. Since the Constitution prohibits aliens from acquiring title to land, extending the lease privilege to them would effectively allow perpetual possession, which is incompatible with the temporary nature of a lease and would circumvent the constitutional prohibition. The Court further held that the classification based on citizenship is reasonable and does not violate the equal protection clause, as the law’s aim is to provide home lots to landless citizens. The denial of Tan Ty’s application also did not constitute a deprivation of property without due process, as her month-to-month tenancy did not create a vested right that the new government owner was bound to respect, and the government did not agree to respect existing tenant contracts upon expropriation.