Pascual vs. Secretary of Public Works 110 Phil 331

Inherent Public Purpose Pascual vs. Secretary of Public Works 110 Phil 331

FACTS: A l a w w a s e n a c t ed i n 1 9 5 3 c o n t a i n i n g a p r o v i s io n f o r t h e c o n s t r u c t i o n , r e c o ns ns t r u c ti ti on on , r ep ep ai ai r, r, e x te te n si si o n a n d i m p ro ro ve ve m en en t o f P as as i g feeder road terminalswithin Antonio Subdivision owned by Senator Jose C. Zulueta. Zulueta “donated” saidparcels of land to the Government 5 months after the enactment of the law, on thecondition that if the Government violates such condition the lands would revert to Zuluet Zulueta. a. The provincia provinciall governor governor of Rizal, Rizal, Wenceslao Wenceslao Pascual, Pascual, questioned questioned the validit validity y of th e d on on at at i on on a nd nd t he he C on on st st it it ut ut io io na n a li li ty ty o f t he he p ar ar ttii cu cu la la r p ro ro vi vi si si on on , i t b ei ei ng ng an appropriation appropriation not for a public p ublic purpose. purpose. ISSUE: Is the appropriation valid? Held:  No . Th e ap p ro p ri a ti on o f am o un t f o r th e c on st ru ct i on on a la n d o wn ed b yp ri v at e individual is invalid imposition since it results in the promotion of privateenterprise, it benefits the property of a particular individual. The provision that theland thereafter be donated to the gover governme nment nt does does not not cure cure this this defe defect. ct. The rule rule istha t if th e pu bl ic ad va nt ag e or be ne fi t is merely incidental in the promotion of aparticular enterprise, such defect shall render the law invalid. On the other hand, if wh at is in ci de n ta l is th e pr om ot io n of a pr iv at e e n t e r p r i s e , t h e t a x l a w s h a l l b e deemed “for public purpose”. Government is Tax-exempt, However it can tax itsel