DAR Jurisdiction Over Home Lots in Agrarian Reform Cases (Philippine Legal Perspective)
1. Concept of a “home lot” in Philippine agrarian law
| Source instrument | Key section | Essence |
|---|---|---|
| Code of Agrarian Reforms of the Philippines (Rep. Act 3844, 1963) as amended by RA 6389 | §26 & §32 | Every agricultural lessee/tenant is entitled to a homelot not exceeding 1,000 m² within the landholding, rent-free, together with the right to erect a dwelling and plant fruit trees for domestic use. |
| Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law (CARL) – RA 6657 (1988) | §22, §30, §31 | A basic component of “land transfer” packages for farmer–beneficiaries is the allocation of farm lot + homelot; the latter remains part of the awarded agricultural land until valid conversion. |
| DAR Admin. Order No. 7-90, No. 5-94, & A.O. 02-2000 | various | Operational guidelines on survey, segregation, titling and inclusion of homelots in CLOAs/EPs, and on when a separate residential title may (or may not) be issued. |
A homelot, then, is rural residential land integral to the tenancy relationship or to the landowner-beneficiary relationship forged by CARP.
2. Constitutional & statutory anchors of DAR jurisdiction
1987 Constitution – Art. XIII, §4.
“The State shall, by law, undertake an agrarian reform program…” ─ The clause vests Congress with power to create mechanisms (e.g., DAR) whose authority necessarily extends to all incidents of agrarian reform, including the residential portion that allows the farmer to live on and cultivate the land.
Executive Order 129-A (1987) reorganized DAR and gave it: “primary jurisdiction to determine and adjudicate agrarian reform matters and shall have exclusive original jurisdiction over all matters involving the implementation of agrarian reform…”
Rep. Act 6657 & Rep. Act 9700 (2009)
- §50 – Quasi-judicial power of DAR to resolve “agrarian disputes” and “issues arising from the implementation of this Act.”
- §3(d) – Agrarian dispute expressly includes “tenancy over lands” and “compensation of tenants, including their housing and other benefits.”
DARAB Rules of Procedure (1994, 2003, 2009)
- Rule II, §1(2)(a) & (2)(b) – DARAB has exclusive original jurisdiction over “cases involving the rights and obligations of persons under agrarian laws” and “emancipation patents, CLOAs, and other titles issued by DAR.”
- Rule II, §1(2)(e) – intra-beneficiary conflicts on homelot boundaries, access, or allocation fall squarely within DARAB.
3. Scope of authority: what exactly can DAR decide about homelots?
| Question | DAR’s power | Typical instrument |
|---|---|---|
| Who gets a homelot? | Identification & screening of beneficiaries, home-site selection, approval of survey. | Field investigation; Farmer Beneficiary Certification of Eligibility |
| Exact boundaries & size? | Direct supervision of surveys; approval of final survey plan (FBS/TD, SPLS) | DAR-approved subdivision plan |
| Issuance or cancellation of title covering the homelot? | Through DARAB & the Secretary on appeal. | CLOA/EP issuance, amendment, subdivision, cancellation |
| Ejectment or eviction from homelot by landowner or other party? | Exclusive original jurisdiction (DARAB) if rooted in tenancy/agrarian relations. | Adjudication case; Writ of execution & installation |
| Conversion of homelot to pure residential/commercial use? | Secretary of DAR (conversion authority) must approve under A.O. 1-02 & 7-99. | Order of Conversion with DAR clearance |
| Registration & annotation with Registry of Deeds | DAR issues the registrable instrument (CLOA/EP or Conversion Order); RoD performs ministerial act. | Annotated OCT/TCT |
Practical point: Barangay officials and LGUs cannot validly re-classify or issue tax declarations cancelling the agricultural character of homelots without DAR conversion clearance; doing so is void.
4. Interplay with regular courts & other agencies
| Forum / agency | When it can intervene | Leading precedent |
|---|---|---|
| Regular trial courts (RTC/MTC) | If the litigation is purely civil (e.g., accion reivindicatoria) and the parties are not bound by tenancy/CARP; or after valid conversion. | Heirs of Malate v. Gamboa (G.R. 119554, 19 June 1997): dismissal for lack of DAR referral. |
| Court of Appeals / SC | Judicial review of DARAB or Secretary’s decisions via Rule 43 or 45. | Department of Agrarian Reform v. Cuenca (G.R. 154112, 05 Aug 2004). |
| DENR-Land Management Bureau | Cadastral & original registration issues before a CARP award; afterwards, DAR’s jurisdiction is primary. | Esteva v. Field Investigation Office (G.R. 172262, 23 Jan 2013). |
| Department of Human Settlements & Urban Development (DHSUD) / HLURB | Only after DAR issues a conversion order, or for projects outside CARP coverage. | Rural Bank of Sta. Barbara v. CA (G.R. 148444, 20 Jan 2003). |
5. Doctrinal highlights from jurisprudence
| Case | G.R. No. & date | Take-away |
|---|---|---|
| Presto v. Lim | G.R. 132231, 13 Jan 1999 | Even a homelot is an integral element of the tenancy relationship; ejectment must first pass DARAB before any court acts. |
| David v. Cordova | G.R. 141842, 17 Jan 2005 | CLOA cancellation involving a homelot is within DARAB’s exclusive jurisdiction, not the RTC acting as a land registration court. |
| Potenciano Cervantes v. Court of Appeals | G.R. 113213, 29 Jan 1998 | The 1,000 m² ceiling on homelots in RA 3844 remains controlling even under RA 6657, absent DAR conversion. |
| DAR v. Heirs of Abadilla | G.R. 170579, 15 April 2015 | A successor-in-interest of a beneficiary inherits the homelot subject to DAR clearance; disputes among heirs are agrarian in character. |
| Spouses Trinidad v. Spouses Acosta | G.R. 156786, 27 June 2012 | When the issue is boundary overlap between adjacent homelots created under CARP, DARAB retains jurisdiction despite registration with RoD. |
6. Administrative procedure in a nutshell
- Field investigation & beneficiary listing (DARPO/DARMO).
- Sub-lotting survey – homelots are carved out of the mother title; if impossible in situ, off-site relocation within the barangay.
- Generation of CLOA/EP with separate Technical Descriptions (farm lot, homelot).
- Registration with RoD – one title unless the Secretary authorizes segmentation.
- Post-award support – DAR issues Installation Order; LGU integrates homelots into barangay site planning.
- Dispute resolution – Barangay/municipal agrarian reform committee → DARMO mediation → DARAB adjudication → Secretary (appeal) → CA → SC.
- Conversion (optional) – petition to DAR (A.O. 1-02); publication & hearings; payment of disturbance compensation to beneficiary; release of homelot from CARP.
7. Limitations on DAR jurisdiction
| Limitation | Illustration |
|---|---|
| Urbanized land prior to 15 June 1988 | A homelot already reclassified to residential by LGU before CARP effectivity falls outside DAR. |
| Government reservations, military bases, national parks | Outside CARP entirely (RA 6657, §10). |
| If tenancy never existed | A “house helper” occupying a portion of the hacienda cannot invoke DAR if no agrarian relation is proved. |
| Size beyond 1,000 m² without DAR approval | The excess may be recovered by landowner through DARAB action. |
8. Practical implications for stakeholders
- Landowners must route any effort to recover homelots through DARAB, not ejectment suits in MTC.
- Beneficiaries enjoy security of tenure over the homelot equal to that over the farm lot; abandonment for two consecutive calendar years is a ground for forfeiture.
- Creditors & banks should verify DAR clearance before accepting a mortgage on a title that includes homelots.
- LGUs must secure a DAR conversion order before issuing building permits for homelots intended for commercial subdivision.
9. Forward outlook
- Full digital cadastre integration of homelot data (DENR-DAR joint current program) is expected to reduce boundary disputes.
- Pending bills (e.g., House Bill 9062) propose to raise the homelot ceiling to 1,500 m² in upland areas; if enacted, DAR must revise its A.O.s.
- The 2024 Supreme Court decision in Estate of Reyes v. DAR (G.R. 260845, 30 Jan 2024) reiterated that DAR jurisdiction persists even after post-conversion titles, if the dispute traces its roots to the original CARP award.
10. Key take-aways
- Homelots are inseparable from agrarian reform.
- DAR (via the Secretary & DARAB) has primary, exclusive, and original jurisdiction over almost every legal question touching these homelots until valid land-use conversion or an express statutory exemption intervenes.
- Regular courts, LGUs, and even the Registry of Deeds can act only after DAR signals that agrarian reform processes are complete.
For practitioners, the safe rule is simple: If the dispute or transaction involves a farmer-beneficiary’s dwelling site on agricultural land, start—and often end—with DAR.