RODRIGUEZ AND RODRIGUEZ, PLAINTIFF AND APPELLANT, VS. SOTERO BALUYOT, ET AL., DEFENDANTS AND APPELLEES.

As owner and licensed operator of a “bowling alley and recreational
establishment” on N. Domingo St. in San Juan, Rizal, located at a distance of
10.97 lineal meters from the Pinaglabanan Park Monument and 173.38 lineal’
meters from a public school building, plaintiff partnership was in January,
1950, required by the mayor of said municipality, acting upon orders from the
Secretary of the Interior, to close the said establishment for being within the
prohibited zone established by Executive Order No. 327 issued on the authority
of Commonwealth Act No. 601. Contesting the validity of both the Executive Order
and the Commonwealth Act, plaintiff petitioned the Court of First Instance of
Rizal for a writ of injunction to stop enforcement of the mayor’s order and,
upon the petition being denied, brought the case here on appeal.

Commonwealth Act No. 601 prohibited the licensing of certain places of
amusement except in accordance with rules and regulations to be promulgated by
the President of the Philippines. On the authority of this Act, the President
promulgated Executive Order No. 327, Series of 1941, prohibiting the maintenance
or operation of bowling alleys within a radius of 200 lineal’ meters from
certain public places, among them,-public parks and institutions of learning.
But on May 21, 1954, Republic Act No. 979 was approved, placing in the hands of
municipal councils the power of regulating bowling alleys and billiard pools
within their respective territorial jurisdictions, but providing that they were
not to be established within a radius of 500 lineal meters “from any public
building, schools, hospitals and churches.” As the exercise of the regulatory
power granted to the President by Commonwealth Act No. 601 is inconsistent with
the exercise of that same power by the municipal councils, as authorized by
Republic Act No. 979, the former enactment (along with the executive orders
issued thereunder) must be deemed repealed by section 2 of the later Act, which
provides that “any law, executive order or parts thereof inconsistent with the
provisions of this Act are hereby repealed.”

On May 17, 1955, Republic Act No. 1224 was approved amending Republic Act No.
979, section 1 of which now reads:

“Section 1. The municipality or city board or council of each chartered city
and the’municinal council of each municipality and municipal district shall have
the power to regulate or prohibit by ordinance the establishment, maintenance
and operation of night clubs, cabarets, dancing schools, pavilions, cockpits,
bars, saloons, bowling alleys, billard pools, and other similar places of
amusement within its territorial jurisdiction: Provided, however, That
no such places of amusement mentioned herein shall be established, maintained
and/or operated within a radius of two hundred lineal meters in the case of
night clubs, cabarets, pavilions, or other similar places, and fifty lineal
meters in the case of dancing schools, bars, saloons, billiard pools, bowling
alleys, or other similar places, except cockpits, the distance of which shall be
left to the discretion of the municipal or city board or council, from any
public building, schools, hospitals and churches: Provided, further,
That no municipal or city ordinance fixing distances at which such places of
amusement may be established or operated shall apply to those already licensed
and operating at the time of the enactment of such municipal or city ordinance,
nor will the subject opening of any public building or other premises from which
distances shall be measured prejudice any place of amusement already then
licensed and operating, but any such place of amusement established within fifty
lineal meters from any school, hospital or church shall be so constructed that
the noise coming therefrom shall not disturb those in the school, hospital or
church, and, if such noise causes such disturbance then such place of amusement
shall not operate during school hours when near a school, of at night when near
a hospital, or when there are religious services when near A church;
Provided, furthermore, That no minor shall be admitted to any bar,
saloon, cabaret or night club employing hostesses: And provided,
finally, (That this Act shall not apply to establishments operating by
virtue of Commonwealth Act Numbered Four hundred eighty-five nor to any
establishment already In operation when Republic Act Numbered Nine hundred
seventy-nine took effect.”

It will be noted that this latest amendment to the law on bowling alleys and
other amusement places prescribes a new norm for ordinances “fixing distances at
which such places of amusement may be established or operated,” but at the same
time provides that such ordinances are not to apply to amusement places
operating at the time of their enactment. Indeed, the law also says that “it is
not to apply to any establishment already in operation when Republic Act No. 979
took effect.” As plaintiff’s establishment was already in operation when the
said Republic Act took effect on May 21, 1954, the same is not subject to the
new norm prescribed in the latest amendment to the law or to any ordinance
approved thereunder.

In view of the foregoing, the decision appealed from is revoked and judgment
shall be entered granting the writ of injunction prayed for. Without costs.

Bengzon, Acting C.J., Padilla, Montemayor, Jugo, Bantista Angelo,
Labrador, Concepcion and Reyes, J.B.L., JJ., concur.

Judgment revoked.