ANTONIO VS. GERONIMO GERONIMO G.R No. 124779 November 29, 2005 FACTS: The Sangguniang Bayan of Antipolo, Rizal passed a resolution authorizing Municipal Mayor Daniel Garcia to acquire through expropriation or purchase, a land situated at Mayamot, Antipolo, Rizal, for public purposes/socialized housing. The land was allegedly owned by private respondent, respondent, Alexander Catolos, in which the petitioners were refusing to vacate vacate even after demand demand of private respondent. respondent.
Prior to the resolution, private respondent filed a motion for issuance of a writ of demolition which the lower court granted and after partial demolition took place, private respondent filed an urgent ex parte motion seeking the full implementation of the writ of demolition which the respondent judge granted. ISSUE: WON A RESOLUTION RESOLUTION FOR FOR EXPROPRIATION EXPROPRIATION BY AN LGU CAN SUSPEND SUSPEND THE WRIT OF EXECUTION AND DEMOLITION IN AN EJECTMENT CASE. RULING: No, a resolution for expropriation by an LGU cannot suspend the writ of execution and demolition in an ejectment case. The Sangguniang Bayan, being a local legislative body, may exercise exercise the power to expropriate private properties, subject to the following requisites, all of which must concur:
1. An ordinance is enacted by the local legislative council authorizing the local chief executive, in behalf of the t he local government unit, to exercise the power of eminent domain or pursue expropriation proceedings over a particular private property. 2. The power of eminent domain is exercised for public use, purpose or welfare, or for the benefit of the poor and and the landless. landless. 3. There is payment of just compensation, as required under Section 9, Article III of the Constitution, and other pertinent laws. 4. A valid and definite offer has been previously made to the owner of the property sought to be expropriated, but said offer was not accepted. In the instant case, no ordinance was passed by the Sangguniang Bayan of Antipolo, instead it were resolutions. An LGU LGU cannot cannot authorize authorize an an expropriation expropriation of private property through a mere resolution. A municipal ordinance is different from a resolution. An ordinance is a law, but a resolution is merely a declaration of the sentiment or opinion of a lawmaking body on a specific matter. An ordinance possesses a general and permanent character, but a resolution is temporary in nature. Additionally, the two are enacted differently a third reading is necessary for an ordinance, but not for a resolution, unless decided otherwise by a majority of all all the Sanggunian members. members.
