G.R. No. 60161 March 21, 1990
HEIRS OF FILOMENO TUYAC represented by Quirica Tuyac-Amora, petitioners, vs. HON. FRANCISCO Z. CONSOLACION, Judge, Court of First Instance, Davao City, Branch III, HON. JACOBO C. CLAVE, Presidential Executive Assistant, Office of the President; HON. CONSTANCIO CASTANEDA, Minister of General Services; DIRECTOR OF BUREAU OF BUILDING AND REAL PROPERTY MANAGEMENT; and ALFREDO MARTIN, respondents.

FACTS

The case involves a dispute over Lot No. 15, a 313-square-meter residential parcel in the government-administered Mitsui Bussan Kaisha Subdivision in Davao City. The Bureau of Building and Real Property Management, pursuant to Republic Act No. 477, awarded the lot to respondent Alfredo Martin, a war veteran who claimed occupancy from December 19, 1953. Petitioners, the heirs of Filomeno Tuyac, protested the award, asserting a better right because their predecessor, a civilian, allegedly occupied the lot on April 9, 1953. The administrative record, however, revealed that in a prior court case, Tuyac had declared being an occupant only after December 31, 1953, and he had constructed a house on the lot in May 1964, which was subsequently ordered demolished as illegal.
The Director of the Bureau dismissed the Tuyac heirs’ protest as tardily filed. This dismissal was affirmed by the Secretary of General Services, who ruled Tuyac was not a qualified awardee under R.A. 477. Despite a successful petition to reopen the case a decade later based on newly discovered evidence, the Secretary again upheld Martin’s award. The Office of the President, through Presidential Executive Assistant Jacobo Clave, affirmed this decision. The Tuyac heirs then filed a special action for certiorari in the Court of First Instance, which was dismissed, prompting this appeal.

ISSUE

The core issue is whether the administrative agencies and the trial court committed grave abuse of discretion in awarding Lot No. 15 to Alfredo Martin instead of to the heirs of Filomeno Tuyac.

RULING

The Supreme Court denied the petition, upholding the award to Alfredo Martin. The legal logic rests on the explicit preference order under R.A. 477, as amended. The law grants first preference to bona fide occupants on or before December 12, 1946. The second preference is for veterans, guerrillas, and other qualified persons who entered the land after December 12, 1946, but not later than December 31, 1953. The Court found that Filomeno Tuyac, a civilian, did not fall within the first preference, as his own judicial admission placed his occupancy after the critical date of December 31, 1953. Consequently, he possessed no statutory preference at all. In contrast, Alfredo Martin, a veteran whose occupancy by December 19, 1953, was uncontested, squarely belonged to the second preference class. Absent any occupant with first preference, Martin, as a second preference awardee, indisputably had a superior right over Tuyac.
The Court further emphasized the finality of administrative findings, especially from agencies with specialized expertise, absent a showing of grave abuse of discretion, which was not present. The protest’s tardy filing provided an independent valid ground for its dismissal. The petitioners’ reliance on a precedent involving a civilian awardee was misplaced, as that case involved a civilian who entered the land in 1946, long before any veteran claimant, thus correctly prioritizing the first preference. No such circumstance existed here. The award to Martin was therefore in strict accordance with law.