City Government of Quezon City v. Himlayang Pilipino
REITERATIONFacts
The Antecedents: The Quezon City Council enacted Ordinance No. 6118, S-64, regulating the establishment, maintenance, and operation of private memorial type cemeteries. Section 9 of this ordinance mandated that at least six percent (6%) of the total area of such cemeteries be set aside for the charity burial of deceased paupers who were residents of Quezon City for at least five years prior to their death. Procedural History: For several years, Section 9 was not enforced. However, seven years after its enactment, the Quezon City Council passed a resolution requesting the City Engineer to stop the sale of memorial park lots by owners who failed to donate the required 6% space for paupers' burial. Consequently, the City Engineer notified respondent Himlayang Pilipino, Inc. of the impending enforcement of Section 9. In response, Himlayang Pilipino, Inc. filed a petition for declaratory relief, prohibition, and mandamus with preliminary injunction, seeking to annul Section 9, alleging it was contrary to the Constitution, the Quezon City Charter, the Local Autonomy Act, and the Revised Administrative Code. The Petition: The Court of First Instance of Rizal, Branch XVIII, declared Section 9 of the ordinance null and void. A motion for reconsideration was denied. The City Government and City Council of Quezon City then filed the instant petition for review, arguing that the taking of property was a valid exercise of police power for public use and that the City Council was authorized under its charter to enact such ordinances for the health, safety, and general welfare of the city.
Issue(s)
Whether Section 9 of Ordinance No. 6118, S-64 of Quezon City is a valid exercise of police power. Whether the ordinance constitutes a taking of private property without due process and just compensation.
Ruling
The petition for review is dismissed, and the decision of the respondent court declaring Section 9 of Ordinance No. 6118, S-64 null and void is affirmed.
Ratio Decidendi
On whether Section 9 of Ordinance No. 6118, S-64 is a valid exercise of police power: The Court held that Section 9 is not a valid exercise of police power. While the Quezon City Charter grants the City Council broad police powers, including the authority to enact ordinances for the health, safety, and general welfare of the city, these powers are not unlimited and must not be repugnant to law. The power to regulate, which is granted to the city, does not include the power to confiscate or prohibit. Section 9, by requiring a mandatory donation of 6% of the cemetery's area for charity burial, goes beyond mere regulation and amounts to an outright confiscation of private property. The Court emphasized that police power is typically exerted to regulate the use and enjoyment of property, not to deprive the owner of it outright without due process, except in cases of necessity to destroy property for the general welfare, such as abating a nuisance or preventing the spread of fire. This case does not fall under such exceptions. On whether the ordinance constitutes a taking of private property without due process and just compensation: The Court found that Section 9 constitutes a taking of private property without due process of law and without just compensation. The ordinance permanently restricts the use of a portion of the property, depriving the owner of its beneficial use. This is not a mere regulation but an outright confiscation, which is impermissible under the due process clause of the Constitution. The Court clarified that while the state has the inherent powers of police power, eminent domain, and taxation, and these powers may interfere with property rights, the exercise of police power, in particular, should not result in confiscation without due process. The Court distinguished this case from regulations requiring subdivision owners to set aside areas for public facilities, which are justified by clear necessities of public safety, health, and convenience, and where the cost is borne by the lot buyers. Here, the ordinance imposes a burden on private cemeteries to provide for the burial of paupers, who are the responsibility of the municipal corporation, without any compensation.
Main Doctrine
Section 9 of Ordinance No. 6118, S-64 of Quezon City, which requires private memorial park cemeteries to set aside six percent (6%) of their total area for the charity burial of paupers, is an invalid exercise of police power as it constitutes a taking of private property without due process and just compensation, and is not a valid regulation for the promotion of health, morals, good order, safety, or the general welfare.