THE Supreme Court has ruled that a public institution must vacate a property or land it occupies if it lacks permission from the owner and the latter has a stronger legal claim.
This was the gist of an April 21, 2025 decision of the SC’s Second Division, where it ordered the Department of Education to vacate and return a parcel of land to its owner, Princess Joama Marcosa Caleda.
Records of the case showed that Caleda, in 2014, bought a 10,637 square meter land in Barangay Iraga, Solana, Cagayan province through an extrajudicial settlement of estate with waiver of rights and sale signed by the heirs of the registered owner, Bueno Gallebo.
However, when Caleda visited the land she bought for a relocation survey, she found out it was being occupied by the Solana Fresh Water Fishery School, an institution under the Department of Education Regional Office 2.
Caleda said she sent several demand letters to DepEd, but all went for naught, forcing her to file a case to recover possession of the land and remove any structures built on it.
DepEd argued it bought the land from Gallebo in 1965 and had been occupying it ever since.
After it lost the case before the Municipal Circuit Trial Court, the Regional Trial Court, and the Court of Appeals, which all held that Caleda had a better right to the property, the DepEd elevated the case to the SC.
In appealing the case to the SC, the DepEd argued that government agencies cannot be evicted from land already being used for public purposes.
It added that it had the right to take over the property through its power of eminent domain, and that Caleda’s only remedy was to seek just compensation.
But the high court ruled otherwise and held that Caleda had clearly proven her better right to the property.
Caleda’s land title, according to the SC, was valid and accurately described the land, unlike the school’s deeds of sale, which were found to cover an adjacent lot.
“The trial courts did not err in ruling that respondent (Caleda) had a better right to possess the lot. She was able to prove her ownership of the property through a preponderance of evidence,” read part of the SC’s 15-page ruling penned by Senior Associate Justice Marvic Leonen.
Concurring with the ruling were Associate Justices Amy Lazaro-Javier, Mario Lopez, Antonio Kho Jr. and Jhosep Lopez.
The SC also held that previous jurisprudences cited by DepEd, such as the cases of National Transmission Corporation versus Bermuda Development Corporation and Republic versus Mendoza, showed that “the government may not be ejected in cases where there is a concomitant neglect on the part of the owner to assert their rights to the property, which is tantamount to an implied acquiescence.”
“Thus, the cases cited by petitioner to support the argument that it cannot be ejected from property devoted to public use do not apply in this case,” it added.
Likewise, the SC held that the DepEd failed to present any competent evidence of ownership over the lot.
“All told, the Court of Appeals did not err in affirming the lower court’s decision ordering the petitioner to vacate the lot and turn over its possession to the respondent for having proven her better right to possession.
Lastly, the high court emphasized that while the government can take private property for public use through its power of eminent domain, this must be done through proper legal proceedings and with payment of just compensation.
Because no expropriation process was initiated in the instant case, the school could not retain the land simply by offering to pay for it.
