Mirasol vs. DPWH, G.R. No.

158793, June 08, 2006

FACTS: On January 10, 2001, petitioners filed before the trial court a Petition for Declaratory Judgment
with Application for Temporary Restraining Order and Injunction to nullity of the following
administrative issuances for being inconsistent with the provisions of Republic Act 2000, entitled
"Limited Access Highway Act" enacted in 1957: (a) DPWH Administrative Order No. 1, Series of 1968;
(b) DPWH Department Order No. 74, Series of 1993; and (c) Art. II, Sec. 3 (a) of the Revised Rules on
Limited Access Facilities promulgated in 199[8] by the DPWH thru the Toll Regulatory Board (TRB).
ISSUE: Whether or not Administrative Order No. 1 introduces an unreasonable classification by singling-
out motorcycles from other motorized modes of transport and violates the right to travel.
HELD: No. Petitioners are not being deprived of their right to use the limited access facility. They are
merely being required, just like the rest of the public, to adhere to the rules on how to use the facility. AO
1 does not infringe upon petitioners’ right to travel but merely bars motorcycles, bicycles, tricycles,
pedicabs, and any non-motorized vehicles as the mode of traveling along limited access highways. There
exists real and substantial differences exist between a motorcycle and other forms of transport sufficient
to justify its classification among those prohibited from plying the toll ways. A classification based on
practical convenience and common knowledge is not unconstitutional simply because it may lack purely
theoretical or scientific uniformity.