FELIPE GANOB, ET AL., PETITIONERS-APPELLANTS, VS. REMEDIOS RAMAS, ET AL., RESPONDENTS-APPELLEES.

Appeal from a decision of the Court of First Instance of Lanao del Norte dismissing the petition for certiorari filed by Felipe Ganob and others praying for the annulment of the decision
rendered by the Secretary of Agriculture and Natural Resources in DANR Case No.
670-A in which the parties were petitioners, on the one hand, and Leodegario Ramas on the other.

After an examination of the record We
agree with the trial court that the following material facts were established
by the evidence:

On July 29, 1930
Ireneo Quidato filed Sales
Application No. 14185 (E-265) for Lot No. 47, PLS-35, Kapatagan
Subdivision located in Kapatagan, Lanao.  On February
13, 1933 the land applied for was awarded to him as a, result of a
public auction held on October 28 of the previous year.  However, his application was cancelled on October 31, 1935 for nonpayment of
the first to the fourth installments due under the award.

Leodegario Ramas
– now deceased and substituted by his heirs, Remedios
Ramas and others – having become interested in the
acquisition of the same lot No. 47, inquired from the Bureau of Lands whether
or not he could acquire whatever rights Quidato had
thereon, to which the Bureau, on September 13, 1937, replied that the sales
application of Quidato may be reinstated upon payment
of the first to the fourth installments plus the interest due thereon.  Thereafter, or more specifically, on August
2, 1937, a deed of transfer of rights was executed by Quidato
in favor of Ramas (Exhibit 12 and 15 for the
Secretary and Director of Lands; Exhibit 4 for Ramas
and Exhibit J for petitioners),
and on the 12th of the same month Ramas paid the
total amount of P937.82 to the Bureau of Lands (Exhibit 29 for the Di­rector of
Lands and Exhibit L for petitioners).  On
January 6, 1938 the Director of Lands reinstated the sales appli­cation of Quidato (Exhibit 14 for the Secretary and 17 for the
Director; Exhibit 6 for Ramas and Exhibit M for peti­tioners)
and an order was issued on the same date directing the District Land Officer
concerned to conduct an investi­gation in connection with the transfer of
rights aforesaid (Exhibit 3 and 16 for the Secretary and Director respectively;
Exhibit 5 for Ramas and Exhibit B-2 for
petitioners).  Pur­suant thereto, Public
Land Inspector Benito M. Napoles con­ducted the
corresponding investigation and subsequently sub­mitted his report dated June
29, 1939 (Exhibit 32 for the Director of Lands and Exhibit P-1 for petitioners)
wherein he stated, among other things, that Ireneo Quidato had al­ready complied with the cultivation
requirements of the lot and that his application was free from adverse claims and conflicts.  On September
14, 1939, the Secretary of Agriculture and Natural Resources
approved said transfer of rights (Exhibit 15 and 18 for the Secretary and
Director of Lands respectively, and Exhibit 7 for Ramas).

Immediately after the transfer of rights, Ramas
occupied the land and introduced improvements thereon.  In the Cadas­tral Survey of Lands located in Kapatagan, the land in question was surveyed and designated
as Lot No. 47, and the only
survey claimant thereto was Leodegario Ramas (Exhibit 1 and 1-A for the Director).  As a result of his occupation, at the
outbreak of the Second World War more than fifty hectares of the area of the
land had already been cultivated by him (Exhibits 3, 4, 7, 8, 9, and 30 for the
Director), and on June 26, 1941, he paid the Bureau of Lands the amount of
P432.12 to complete the payment of the purchase price (Exhibit 19 and 16 for
the Director and Secretary respectively, and Exhibit 8, Ramas).

It seems that during the war
years, due to the prevailing confusion and disorder, Ramas’
possession of the land was not complete. 
This enabled petitioners to enter and take possession thereof.  After the war, however, as Leodegario Ramas had already
died, his heirs went to the land in question to resume its occupation and
cultivation, but they found petitioners in occupancy.

If the basic petition filed below is to prosper, it is clear that
petitioners are in duty bound to make out a clear case to
this effect: either that the Director of the Bureau of Lands and the Secretary
of Agriculture and Natural Re­sources had no jurisdiction over the subject
matter of the decisions or orders sought to be annulled, or that, in rendering
or issuing them, they acted in excess of their jurisdiction or with grave abuse
of discretion.

Upon the facts setforth above which, as
already stated, are completely borne out by the evidence of record, We are of the opinion, and so hold, that said officials
acted within the scope of their respective jurisdiction under the law and
committed no error nor grave abuse of discretion in rendering or issuing the
decisions or orders aforesaid.

That the lot in question was applied for and subsequently awarded
in accordance with law to Ireneo Quidato,
and that thereafter he entered into possession thereof and had already
cultivated an area of more than fifty hectares when the last World War broke
out, is a finding of fact made by the respondent officials, and this is fully supported by the evidence.

It is true that for nonpayment of the first four install­ments
which Quidato was under obligation to pay to the
Government, his application was cancelled on October 31, 1935, but it is
nonetheless true that, subsequently, or more specifical­ly on January 6, 1938,
said application was reinstated by the Director of Lands and that even prior to
that date, the sum of P937.82 was paid to the government on account of the
installments in arrears by Leodegario Ramas to whom Quidato had
transferred his rights.  That said
transfer was subse­quently approved is unmistakably shown by the fact that
after its execution and the payment of the arrearages, the Bureau of Lands,
through Public Land Inspector Napoles, investigated
the propriety thereof, and after said investigation he recommended its approval
in a report dated June 29, 1939.  As a
result, on September 14, 1939
the Secretary of Agri­culture and Natural Resources approved it.  These events were followed by Ramas occupying the land applied for and cultivating the
same up to an area of more than
fifty hectares before the outbreak of the last World War.

That the Bureau of Lands had authority to reinstate the cancelled
application of Quidato – as it did by its order of
January 6, 1938, that is, more than one year before the herein petitioners had
intruded into the land in question – can not be doubted.  Public lands are placed under the
administration of said Bureau for final disposition in favor of citizens who
apply for them in accordance with law. 
It can not be doubted that the reinstatement of a cancelled sales
application, which cancellation was due exclusively to non-payment of the
installments due under the award, is undoubted­ly a matter within the sound
discretion of the Director of the Bureau of Lands, and if his action thereon
was subsequent­ly approved, expressly or impliedly, by the Department Head, it is clear that it becomes unassailable
if all the proceed­ings were – as in this case – in accordance with law.

Moreover, from the decision of the Secretary of Agriculture and
Natural Resources complained of, petitioners had a plain, speedy and adequate
remedy by appealing therefrom to the Chief
Executive.  In other words, before filing
the present action for certiorari in
the court below, they should have availed of this administrative remedy and
their failure to do so must be deemed fatal to their case (Calo
vs. Fuertes et al., G. R. No. L-16537, June 29, 1962).  To place petitioners’ case, beyond the pale
of this rule, they must show that their case falls – which it does not – within
the cases where, in accordance with our decisions, the aggrieved party need not
exhaust administrative remedies within his reach in the ordinary course of the
law (Tapales vs. the President and the Board of
Regents of the U.P., G. R. No. L-17523, March 30, 1963; Mangubat vs. Osmeña
G. R. No. L-12837, April 30, 1959; Baguio vs. Honorable Jose Rodriguez, G. R. No. L-11078,
May 27, 1959; Pascual vs. Provincial Board, G. R. No.
L-11959, October 31, 1959;
Marinduque Iron Mines etc. vs. Secretary of Public
Works, G. R. No. L-15982, May 31, 1963;
Alzate vs. Aldaba, G. R.
L-14407, February 29, 1960
and Demaisip vs. Court of Appeals, G. R. No. L-13000,
September 25, 1959).

WHEREFORE, the writ prayed for is hereby denied, with
costs.

Reyes, J.B.L., Acting C.J., Makalintal,
Zaldivar, Sanchez, Fernando, Teehankee,
and Barredo, JJ., concur.

Concepcion, C.J., and Castro, J., on official leave of absence.

Capistrano, J., did not take
part.