This case has been cited 1 times or more.
|
2013-11-20 |
PERLAS-BERNABE, J. |
||||
| The right of retention, as protected and enshrined in the Constitution, balances the effects of compulsory land acquisition by granting the landowner the right to choose the area to be retained subject to legislative standards.[30] Necessarily, since the said right is granted to limit the effects of compulsory land acquisition against the landowner, it is a prerequisite that the land falls under the coverage of the OLT Program of the government. If the land is beyond the ambit of the OLT Program, the landowner need not as he should not apply for retention since the appropriate remedy would be for him to apply for exemption. As explained in the case of Daez v. CA[31] (Daez): Exemption and retention in agrarian reform are two (2) distinct concepts. | |||||