GLICERIO TINIO AND TEODORA LIMBAN, PETITIONERS-APPELLANTS, VS. RODRIGO MACAPAGAL, LUIS MARIN, ERNESTO PUNO, PABLO PUNO, TOMAS SAGUN, CIRILO MARIANO, VICTORIANO TUMIBAY, BUENAVEN…

Petition for review by certiorari of a decision of the Court of
Agrarian Relations granting the petition of herein respondents, Rodri­go Macapagal and ten (10) other persons,^[1]
for a change of their tenancy contract with petitioners herein, Glicerio Tinio and Teodora Limban, from share to
leasehold system, as provided in Section 14 of Re­public Act No. 1199, as
amended, granting the tenant the unilateral right to make such change.^[2]

Petitioners assail the constitutionality of the grant of said op­tion
as a denial of both due process and equal protection.  These ob­jections have, however, been
repeatedly rejected by this Court,^[3]
upon the ground that the contested legal precept is a reasonable and valid
exercise of the police power of the State, to afford a relief to a
socio-economic problem existing in the Philippines, and we find no
justification to revise or otherwise alter our view thereon.

WHEREFORE , the decision appealed from should be, as it is
hereby affirmed, with costs against petitioners-appellants.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Reyes, Dizon, Regala,
Makalintal, Bengzon, Zaldivar, Sanchez, and
Castro, JJ., concur.

^[1]
Luis Marin, Ernesto Puno, Pablo Puno,
Tomas Sagun, Cirilo
Mariano, Victoriano Tumibay,
Lorenzo Macapagal, Buenaven­tura Talao,
Victor Puyat and Pedro Mana.

^[2]
Sec. 14. Change of System – The tenant shall have the right to change the
tenancy contract from one of share tenancy to lease­hold tenancy and vice versa
and from one crop sharing arrange­ment to another of the share tenancy.  If the share tenancy con­tract is in writing
and duly registered, the right to change from one crop sharing arrangement to
another may be exercised at least one month before the beginning of the next
agricultural year after the expiration of the period of the contract.  In the absence of any registered written
contract, the right may be exercised at least one month before the agricultural
year when the change shall be effected.

^[3]
llusorio vs. Court of Agrarian Relations, G.R.
No. L-20344 (May 16, 1966), Cuizon vs. Court
of Agrarian Relations, G.R. No. L-20905 (April 30, 1966), Gamboa
vs. Pallarca, G.R. No. L-20407 (March 31,
1966), Uichangco vs. Gutierrez, et al., G.R.
No. L-20275 (May 31, 1965), Macasaet vs. Court
of Industrial Relations, et al., G.R. No. L-19750 (July 17, 1964) and Ramas vs. Court of Agrarian Relations, G.R. No.
L-19555 (May 29, 1964).