G.R. No. L-17821 November 29, 1963 PRIMITIVO LOVINA, and NLL! MONTILLA, plaintiffs-appellees,vs. "ON. #LORN$IO MORNO, a% &e're(ar) o* P+b,-' .or/% and $omm+n-'a(-on%, and 0N1AMIN !ON2ON, defendants-appellants. #A$T&3 ResidentsofMacabebe, PampangafiledapetitiontotheSecretaryofPublic WorksandCommunications,complaining thatSpousesovinahadblockedthe!Sapang"ulati!,anavigableriverinthesaidmunicipality.#heseresidentsasked thattheobstructionsbeorderedremoved,undertheprovisionsofRepublic$ct %o.&'().$fternoticeandhearingto the parties, the said Secretary found the constructions to be a public nuisance in navigable *aters, and, in his decision ordered the land o*ners, Spouses ovina, to remove five+(, closures of Sapang"ulati-other*ise, the Secretary *ould order their removal at the e.pense of the respondent.$fter receiptof thedecision, the respondent filed a petition in theC/0 Manila torestrain the Secretary from enforcing his decision. #he trial court, after due hearing, granted a permanent in1unction, *hich is no* the sub1ect of the present appeal. Spouse ovina contended that Republic $ct %o. &'() is unconstitutional because it invests the Secretary of Public Works and Communications *ith s*eeping, unrestrained, final and unappealable authority to pass upon the issues of *hether ariverorstreamispublicandnavigable,*hetheradamencroachesuponsuch*atersandisconstitutiveasapublic nuisance,and*hetherthela*appliestothestateoffacts,therebyConstitutinganallegedunla*fuldelegationof 1udicial po*er to the Secretary of Public Works and Communications. I&&43WhetherornotRepublic$ct%o.&'()isunconstitutionalonthegroundofunduedelegationof1udicialpo*ers, therefore a violation of the principle of separation of po*ers "L53 %2.0t*illbenotedthatR.$.&'()merelyempo*erstheSecretarytoremoveunauthori3edobstructionsor encroachmentsuponpublicstreams,constructionsthatnoprivateperson*asany*ayentitledtomake,becausethe bed of navigable streams is public property, and o*nership thereof is not ac4uirable by adverse possession.0tistruethatthee.erciseoftheSecretary5spo*erunderthe$ctnecessarilyinvolvesthedeterminationofsome 4uestions of fact, such as the e.istence of the stream and its previous navigable character- but these functions, *hether 1udicial or 4uasi-1udicial, are mere,) -n'-den(a, to the e.ercise of the po*er granted by la* to clear navigable streams of unauthori3ed obstructions or encroachments, and authorities are clear that they are, va,-d,) 'on*erab,e +6on e7e'+(-ve o**-'-a,% 6rov-ded (8e 6ar() a**e'(ed -% 9-ven o66or(+n-() (o be 8eard, as is e.pressly re4uired by Republic $ct %o. &'(), section &. 0t thusappears that the de,e9a(-onb)$on9re%%(o e7e'+(-ve or adm-n-%(ra(-ve a9en'-e% o**+n'(-on% o*:+d-'-a,, or a( ,ea%(,;+a%--:+d-'-a,*+n'(-on%-%-n'-den(a,(o(8ee7er'-%eb)%+'8a9en'-e%o*(8e-re7e'+(-veoradm-n-%(ra(-ve 6o