1 digest ros vs dar

Ros, et al. vs DAR, et al. G.R. No. 132477, August 31, 2005 FACTS: Petitioners are the owners/developers of several parcels of land. By virtue of a Municipal Ordinance, these lands were reclassified as industrial lands. As part of their preparation for the development of the subject lands as an industrial park, petitioners secured all the necessary permits and appropriate government certifications. However, the DAR disallowed disall owed the conversion of the subject lands for industrial use and directed the petitioners to cease and desist from further developme nts on the land. Petitioners filed with the RTC a Complaint for Injunction with Application for Temporary Restraining Order and a Writ of Preliminary Injunction. However, the RTC, ruling that it is the the DAR which has jurisdiction, dismissed the complaint. When the case was brought to the SC, it was referred to the CA. However, the CA affirmed the dismissal of the case. Hence, this petition. ISSUES: 1. Whether or not the DAR has the primary jurisdiction over the case. After the passage of Republic Act No. 6657, otherwise known as Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program, agricultural lands, though reclassified, have to go through the process of conversion,  jurisdiction over which is vested in the DAR. The Department of Agrarian Reform (DAR) is mandated to approve or disapprove applications for conversion, restructuring or readjustment of agricultural lands into non-agricultural uses, pursuant to Section 4(i) of Executive Order No. 129-A, Ser ies of 1987. Section 65 of R.A. No. 6657, otherwise known as the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law of  1988, likewise empowers the DAR to authorize under certain conditions, the reclassification or conversion of agricultural lands. It being settled that jurisdiction over conversion of land is vested in the DAR, the complaint for injunction was correctly dismissed by the trial and appellate courts under the doctrine of primary  jurisdiction. The doctrine of primary jurisdiction precludes the courts from resolving a controversy over which jurisdiction has initially been lodged with an administrative administrative body of special competence. For agrarian reform cases, jurisdiction is vested in the Department of Agrarian Reform (DAR); more specifically, in the Department of Agrarian Reform Adjudication Board (DARAB).

2. Whether or not the RTC can issue issue a writ of injunction against the DAR. Section 68 of Rep. Act No. 6657 provides: SEC. 68. Immunity of Government Agencies from Undue Interference. Interference.  No injunction, restraining restraining order, prohibition or mandamus shall be issued by the lower courts against the Department of Agrarian Reform (DAR), the Department of Agriculture (DA), the Department of Environment and Natural  Resources (DENR), and the Department of Justice (DOJ) in their implementation of the program.