Conversion is the act of changing the Current Use of an Agricultural Land into Non-Agricultural Use

as approved by the DAR.

RECLASSIFICATION IS THE ACT OF SPECIFYING HOW AGRICULTURAL LANDS SHALL BE
UTILIZED FOR NON-AGRICULTURAL USES SUCH AS RESIDENTIAL, INDUSTRIAL, AND
COMMERCIAL, AS EMBODIED IN THE LAND USE PLAN, SUBJECT TO THE REQUIREMENTS AND
PROCEDURES FOR LAND USE CONVERSION.
MERE RECLASSIFICATION OF AN AGRICULTURAL LAND DOES NOT AUTOMATICALLY ALLOW A
LANDOWNER TO CHANGE ITS USE. HE HAS TO UNDERGO THE PROCESS OF CONVERSION BEFORE
HE IS PERMITTED TO USE THE AGRICULTURAL LAND FOR OTHER PURPOSES. CREBA VS. THE
SECRETARY OF DAR, G.R. NO. 183409, 18 JUNE 2010
Conversion legal basis

Section 65 of REPUBLIC ACT (R.A.) No. 6657, AS AMENDED; ❖DAR AO No. 1, Series of 2002; ❖DOJ
Opinion No. 44, SERIES of 1990; ❖Memorandum Circular No.1, Series of 2015

In the same vein, the authority of the Secretary of Agrarian Reform to include "lands not reclassified
as residential, commercial, industrial or other non-agricultural uses before 15 June 1988" in the
definition of agricultural lands finds basis in jurisprudence. In Ros v. Department of Agrarian
Reform,39 this Court has enunciated that after the passage of Republic Act No. 6657, agricultural
lands, though reclassified, have to go through the process of conversion, jurisdiction over which is
vested in the DAR. However, agricultural lands, which are already reclassified before the effectivity
of Republic Act No. 6657 which is 15 June 1988, are exempted from conversion.40 It bears
stressing that the said date of effectivity of Republic Act No. 6657 served as the cut-off period for
automatic reclassifications or rezoning of agricultural lands that no longer require any DAR
conversion clearance or authority.41 It necessarily follows that any reclassification made thereafter
can be the subject of DAR’s conversion authority. Having recognized the DAR’s conversion authority
over lands reclassified after 15 June 1988, it can no longer be argued that the Secretary of Agrarian
Reform was wrongfully given the authority and power to include "lands not reclassified as
residential, commercial, industrial or other non-agricultural uses before 15 June 1988" in the
definition of agricultural lands. Such inclusion does not unduly expand or enlarge the definition of
agricultural lands; instead, it made clear what are the lands that can be the subject of DAR’s
conversion authority, thus, serving the very purpose of the land use conversion provisions of
Republic Act No. 6657.
This Court held in Alarcon v. Court of Appeals43 that reclassification of lands does not suffice.
Conversion and reclassification differ from each other. Conversion is the act of changing the current
use of a piece of agricultural land into some other use as approved by the DAR while reclassification
is the act of specifying how agricultural lands shall be utilized for non-agricultural uses such as
residential, industrial, and commercial, as embodied in the land use plan, subject to the
requirements and procedures for land use conversion. In view thereof, a mere reclassification of an
agricultural land does not automatically allow a landowner to change its use. He has to undergo the
process of conversion before he is permitted to use the agricultural land for other purposes. 44
It is clear from the aforesaid distinction between reclassification and conversion that agricultural
lands though reclassified to residential, commercial, industrial or other non-agricultural uses must
still undergo the process of conversion before they can be used for the purpose to which they are
intended.

Nevertheless, emphasis must be given to the fact that DAR’s conversion authority can only be
exercised after the effectivity of Republic Act No. 6657 on 15 June 1988. 45 The said date served as
the cut-off period for automatic reclassification or rezoning of agricultural lands that no longer
require any DAR conversion clearance or authority. 46 Thereafter, reclassification of agricultural
lands is already subject to DAR’s conversion authority. Reclassification alone will not suffice to use
the agricultural lands for other purposes. Conversion is needed to change the current use of
reclassified agricultural lands.

It is of no moment whether the reclassification of agricultural lands to residential, commercial,

industrial or other non-agricultural uses was done by the LGUs or by way of Presidential
Proclamations because either way they must still undergo conversion process. It bears stressing
that the act of reclassifying agricultural lands to non-agricultural uses simply specifies how
agricultural lands shall be utilized for non-agricultural uses and does not automatically convert
agricultural lands to non-agricultural uses or for other purposes. As explained in DAR
Memorandum Circular No. 7, Series of 1994, cited in the 2009 case of Roxas & Company, Inc. v.
DAMBA-NFSW and the Department of Agrarian Reform, 47 reclassification of lands denotes their
allocation into some specific use and providing for the manner of their utilization and disposition or
the act of specifying how agricultural lands shall be utilized for non-agricultural uses such as
residential, industrial, or commercial, as embodied in the land use plan. For reclassified agricultural
lands, therefore, to be used for the purpose to which they are intended there is still a need to
change the current use thereof through the process of conversion. The authority to do so is vested
in the DAR, which is mandated to preserve and maintain agricultural lands with increased
productivity. Thus, notwithstanding the reclassification of agricultural lands to non-agricultural
uses, they must still undergo conversion before they can be used for other purposes.

Even reclassification of agricultural lands by way of Presidential Proclamations to non-agricultural

uses, such as school sites, needs conversion clearance from the DAR. We reiterate that
reclassification is different from conversion. Reclassification alone will not suffice and does not
automatically allow the landowner to change its use. It must still undergo conversion process
before the landowner can use such agricultural lands for such purpose. 48 Reclassification of
agricultural lands is one thing, conversion is another. Agricultural lands that are reclassified to non-
agricultural uses do not ipso facto allow the landowner thereof to use the same for such purpose.
Stated differently, despite having reclassified into school sites, the landowner of such reclassified
agricultural lands must apply for conversion before the DAR in order to use the same for the said
purpose.

Any reclassification, therefore, of agricultural lands to residential, commercial, industrial or other

non-agricultural uses either by the LGUs or by way of Presidential Proclamations enacted on or
after 15 June 1988 must undergo the process of conversion, despite having undergone
reclassification, before agricultural lands may be used for other purposes.

It is different, however, when through Presidential Proclamations public agricultural lands have
been reserved in whole or in part for public use or purpose, i.e., public school, etc., because in such a
case, conversion is no longer necessary. As held in Republic v. Estonilo, 49 only a positive act of the
President is needed to segregate or reserve a piece of land of the public domain for a public
purpose. As such, reservation of public agricultural lands for public use or purpose in effect
converted the same to such use without undergoing any conversion process and that they must be
actually, directly and exclusively used for such public purpose for which they have been reserved,
otherwise, they will be segregated from the reservations and transferred to the DAR for
distribution to qualified beneficiaries under the CARP. 50 More so, public agricultural lands already
reserved for public use or purpose no longer form part of the alienable and disposable lands of the
public domain suitable for agriculture.51 Hence, they are outside the coverage of the CARP and it
logically follows that they are also beyond the conversion authority of the DAR.

Agricultural land refers to those devoted to agricultural activity as defined in RA 6657 and not classified
as mineral or forest by the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) and its
predecessor agencies and not classified in town plans and zoning ordinances as approved by the
Housing and Land Use Regulatory Board (HLURB) and its preceding competent authorities prior to 15
June 1988 for residential, commercial or industrial use

III. DEFINITION OF TERMS

A. Agricultural land refers to land devoted to agricultural activity and not classified as
mineral, forest, residential, commercial or industrial land (Section 3[c], R.A. No. 6657).

B. Conversion is the act of changing the current use of a piece of agricultural land into
some other use.

C. Reclassification of agricultural lands is the act of specifying how agricultural lands

shall be utilized for non-agricultural uses such as residential, industrial, commercial, as
embodied in the land use plan. It also includes the reversion of non-agricultural lands to
agricultural use.

According to the Court, the ruling in Fortich v. Corona64 and reiterated in Province of Camarines Sur,
et al. v. Court of Appeals,65 settled is the rule that local government units need not obtain the
approval of DAR to convert or reclassify lands from agricultural to non-agricultural use

The power of the local government to convert or reclassify lands to residential lands to non-
agricultural lands reclassified is not subject to the approval of the Department of Agrarian Reform.
(Pasong Bayabas Farmers Association vs. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 142359 / 142980, May 25,
2004)

Differentiate reclassification and conversion

General Supervision

"In administration law supervision means overseeing or the power or authority of an officer to see
that subordinate officers perform their duties. If the latter fail or neglect to fulfill them the former may
take such action or step as prescribed by law to make them perform their duties. Control, on the
other hand, means the power of an officer to alter or modify or nullify or set aside what a subordinate
officer had done in the performance of his duties and to substitute the judgment of the former for that
of the latter." Mondano vs. Silvosa