G.R. No. 147146. July 29, 2005 JOSE, JULIO and FEDERICO, ll Su!na"#d JUNIO, JUNIO, Petitioners, vs. ERNES$O D. GRILO, %n &%' Ca(a)%*y a' S#)!#*a!y o+ !a!%an R#+o!", Respondents. R#+o!", Respondents.
FC$SPetitioners claim that Sta. Lucia Realty Corporation and the Estate of Guillermo Villasor, represented represented by Irvin Villasor, Villasor, are bulldo!in and levelin certain parcel of aricultural lands in "acolod for the purpose of convertin it into a residential subdivision# that as prospective C$RP bene%ciaries of the land in &uestion, 'bein former laborers, actual occupants and permanent residents of "aranay Pahanocoy,( their rihts )ill be pre*udiced by the illeal conversion of the land into a residential subdivision.
+n --, --, the /$R /$R$" +IC E0ecu E0ecutiv tive e /irect /irector or for)ar for)arded ded the compla complaint int to P$R$/ $R$/ for appropriate action. "efore any hearin could be conducted thereon, the Secretary of the /$R /$R issue issued d an +rder +rder e0empti e0emptin n from from C$RP C$RP covera coverae e such such lands lands since since the same same )as )as classi%ed as residential residential prior to the e1ectivity of C$RL on 2une 3, -44.
5he Court of $ppeals sustained the E0emption +rder issued by public respondent. respondent. 6ence, this petition.
ISSUE7hether or not the sub*ect lands are covered by the C$RP.
&ELD 5he Petition Petition is devoid devoid of merit.
Section of R$ 8839 speci%cally provides lands covered by the C$RP and it includes “All private lands devoted to or suitable for agriculture regardless of the agricultural products raised or that can be raised thereon.”
Section :;c< of the C$RL de%nes agricultural land as that )hich is =devoted to aricultural activity and not classi%ed as mineral, forest, residential, commercial or industrial land.=
5he meanin of agricultural lands covered by the C$RL )as e0plained further by the /$R in its $dministrative +rder >o. , Series of --?, entitled =Revised Rules and Reulations Governin Conversion of Private $ricultural Land to >on@$ricultural Ases,= issued pursuant to Section - of C$RL, )hich )e &uoteB
=$ricultural land refers to those devoted to aricultural activity as de%ned in R.$. 8839 and not classi%ed as mineral or forest by the /epartment of Environment and >atural Resources ;/E>R< and its predecessor aencies, and not classifed in town plans and zoning ordinances as approved by the Housing and Land Use Regulatory Board (HLURB) and its preceding competent authorities prior to 1 !une 1"## $or residential% commercial or industrial use.=
$ccordin to /$R $+ 8@-, an application for e0emption from the coverae of the C$RP must be accompanied by a certi%cation from the 6LAR" that the pertinent !onin ordinance has been approved by the "oard prior to 2une 3, -44. In the instant case, the lando)ner did %le an accompanyin Certi%cation from the 6LAR".
5he Certi%cations carried the presumption of reularity in their issuance. Petitioners did not present any evidence to overcome that presumption. 5he letter of the deputi!ed !onin administrator of "acolod City @@ cited by petitioners to contradict the Certi%cations @@ did not touch on, much less corroborate, their claim that the sub*ect landholdin remained classi%ed as aricultural. It merely restated )hat )as already provided in the la) @@ that only the Sanunian Panlunsod of "acolod City could reclassify lands.
Petitioners ne0t assert that, for ta0 purposes, the sub*ect property )as declared by its o)ners as aricultural land since time immemorial until at least --. It is settled, ho)ever, that a ta0 declaration is not conclusive of the nature of the property for !onin purposes. Ander the Real Property 5a0 Code, a ta0 declaration serves only to enable the assessor to identify a property for assessment levels, not to bind a provincialcity assessor.
Conse&uently, even if the sub*ect landholdin has been declared as aricultural for ta0ation purposes, once a local overnment has reclassi%ed it as residential, that determination must prevail for !onin purposes.