Facts: The said case was filed by the petitioners by way of a Petition for Certiorari and Prohibition under

Rule 65 of the Rules of Court. It was addressed to nullify and declared as unconstitutional, R.A. 97 6 entitled !An Act Reapportionin" the Co#position of the $irst % st& and 'econd (e"islati)e *istricts %+nd& in the pro)ince of Ca#arines 'ur and Thereby Creatin" a ,ew (e"islati)e *istrict fro# such Reapportion#ent.'aid Act ori"inated fro# .ouse /ill ,o. 0+60, and it was enacted by President 1acapa"al2Arroyo. 3ffectuatin" the act, it has di)ided the e4istin" four districts, and apportioned districts shall for# additional district where the new first district shall be co#posed of 76,565 population count. Petitioners contend that the reapportion#ent runs afoul of the e4plicit constitutional standard with a #ini#u# population of +57,777 for the creation of a le"islati)e district under 'ection 5 %5&, Article 8I of the 967 Constitution. It was e#phasi9ed as well by the petitioners that if population is less than that pro)ided by the Constitution, it #ust be stric:en2down for non2co#pliance with the #ini#u# population re;uire#ent, unless otherwise fi4ed by law. Respondents ha)e ar"ued that the petitioners are "uilty of two fatal technical effects< first, error in choosin" to assail R.A. 97 6 )ia the Re#edy of Certiorari and Prohibition under Rule 65 of the Rules of Court. And second, petitioners ha)e no locus standi to ;uestion the constitutionality of R.A. 97 6. Issue< =hether or not Republic Act ,o. 97 6 is unconstitutional and therefore null and )oid, or whether or not a population of +57,777 is an indispensable constitutional re;uire#ent for the creation of a new le"islati)e district in a pro)ince. Held< It was ruled that the said Act is constitutional. The plain and clear distinction between a city and a pro)ince was e4plained under the second sentence of 'ection 5 %5& of the Constitution. It states that a pro)ince is entitled into a representati)e, with nothin" was #entioned about a population. =hile in cities, a #ini#u# population of +57,777 #ust first be satisfied. In +777, Ca#'ur had a population of ,695,6+ #a:in" the pro)ince entitled to two additional districts fro# the present of four. /ased on the for#ulation of >rdinance, other than population, the results of the apportion#ent were )alid. And lastly, other factors were #entioned durin" the deliberations of .ouse /ill ,o. 0+60.