G.R. No. 92605 ; July 16, 1991
APEX MINING CO., INC., ET AL., petitioners, vs. HON. CANCIO C. GARCIA, ET AL., and MARCOPPER MINING CORPORATION, respondents.

FACTS

The controversy involves conflicting mining claims over a 4,941-hectare area within the Agusan-Davao-Surigao Forest Reserve, established by Proclamation No. 369 in 1931. Private respondent Marcopper Mining Corporation (MARCOPPER) initially registered 16 mining claims in January 1984 but, upon learning the area was within a forest reservation, abandoned these claims. It subsequently applied for and was granted a Permit to Prospect by the Bureau of Forest Development (BFD) and later a Permit to Explore (No. 133) by the Bureau of Mines and Geo-Sciences (BMGS). Petitioners Apex Mining Co., Inc., et al. (APEX) held earlier registered mining claims and small-scale mining permits over the same area. MARCOPPER petitioned for the cancellation of APEX’s claims, arguing they were void for being located within a forest reserve and improperly acquired through registration instead of the required application process.
The BMGS initially granted APEX’s motion to dismiss and declared MARCOPPER’s Permit to Explore null and void. However, the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) reversed this, upholding MARCOPPER’s permit and declaring APEX’s claims null and void. The Office of the President affirmed the DENR’s decision. APEX elevated the case to the Supreme Court via a petition for certiorari.

ISSUE

Whether the mining claims and permits of APEX are valid, considering the disputed area is within an established forest reservation.

RULING

The Supreme Court dismissed the petition and affirmed the decision of the Office of the President. The Court held that the disputed area is indisputably within the Agusan-Davao-Surigao Forest Reserve. Under Presidential Decree No. 463 (The Mineral Resources Development Decree), areas within forest reservations are closed to mining location. The proper procedure to acquire mining rights in such areas is not through the registration of declarations of location with the BMGS, but by first applying for a permit to prospect with the BFD, followed by an application for a permit to explore with the BMGS. MARCOPPER correctly followed this procedure after discovering its initial error. In contrast, APEX’s mining claims and small-scale mining permits, having been acquired through direct registration in violation of the prescribed procedure for forest reserves, are null and void. The Court further emphasized that factual findings of administrative agencies, when supported by substantial evidence, are accorded respect and finality. No grave abuse of discretion was found in the administrative rulings.