G.R. No. L-7481 December 23, 1954
UNIVERSITY OF THE EAST, petitioner-appellee, vs. CITY OF MANILA and ALEJO AQUINO, ETC., respondents-appellants.

FACTS

On September 4, 1953, the University of the East filed an application with the City Engineer of Manila for a permit to construct a four-story high school building on its lot on Gastambide Street, Sampaloc, Manila. The petitioner submitted plans and specifications conforming to Manila’s Zonification Ordinance No. 2830, as amended by Ordinance No. 2906, but not conforming to the Zoning Regulations adopted and promulgated by the National Planning Commission on March 18, 1953. These Zoning Regulations required specific minimum yard depths (e.g., six meters for front yard). The City Engineer, citing the Zoning Regulations, notified the petitioner to amend its plans. Upon the petitioner’s failure to comply, the City Engineer refused to issue the permit. The petitioner then filed an action for mandamus in the Court of First Instance of Manila to compel the issuance of the permit. Judge Rafael Amparo declared the Zoning Regulations of the National Planning Commission null and void and ordered the City Engineer to issue the permit. The City of Manila and the City Engineer appealed this decision.

ISSUE

Whether the Zoning Regulations adopted and promulgated by the National Planning Commission on March 18, 1953, are valid and enforceable against the petitioner.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the lower court’s decision, declaring the Zoning Regulations null and void. The Court held that the regulations were ineffective for two primary reasons. First, under Section 7 of Executive Order No. 98 (series of 1946), any zoning resolution adopted by the Commission must be filed with the local legislative body having jurisdiction (the Municipal Board of Manila, in this case). The resolution would take effect unless disapproved by a three-fourths vote within 30 days. It was an uncontested fact that the Municipal Board of Manila had not adopted the Zoning Regulations as an ordinance and had even protested against them, recommending public hearings before any final action. Therefore, an essential requisite for the regulations to take effect was not complied with. Second, the Court ruled that the issuance of such zoning regulations, which significantly affect important property rights, cannot be delegated to an administrative commission without specific standards and limitations to guide its discretion, citing the precedent in People vs. Vera. Consequently, the City Engineer was ordered to issue the construction permit in accordance with the petitioner’s submitted plans and specifications. Costs were assessed against the appellants.