Facts: Ruling; YES.
96. Nawasa v. - Project Engineer of Angat River Irrigation System filed a
Secretary of Public complaint to the Director of Public Works asking that
Works representations be made to NAWASA to secure the
release of enough water from IPO Dam to avert a crop
failure in Bulacan and from the refusal of NAWASA to
grant the request because of law water level.
- After a series of indorsements, Acting Usec of Public
Works rendered an administrative decision recognizing
that Executive Proclamation Nos. 48 and 72 reserved
3600 and 40,000 liters per second of water from Angat
River for the Metropolitan Water District (predecessor
of NAWASA) and Angat River Irrigation System.
- However it decalred that NAWASA is not entitled to
priority in the use of such water and ordered such
entity to apply for water rights with the Bureau of
Public Works.
- NAWASA sought reconsideration for the same but was
denied. Thereafter it appealed to the court which
granted the same.
ISSUE: WON NAWASA can use the water?
 The court said that it is clear from the declaration by General
Leonard Wood pursuant to Act. No. 2152 that “it designates as
exempt from appropriation and reserve for the use of the
Metropolitan Water District of Manila, 3500 liters per second
of time or so much thereof as may be needed for domestic
purposes of the water of Angat River.”
 The words used necessarily imply that the district was granted
authority to withdraw and make exclusive use of the said
amount of water. This in effect gives NAWASA priority to use
the same in favor of the Angat River Irrigation System.
 The court said that the proclamations in favor of the
Metropolitan Water District constituted valid and operative
administrative concession in favor of appellee’s predecessor
and it made use of the water without objection from any party
until 1958.
 Therefore from 1913 to 1959, the NAWASA and its
predecessors in interest had openly, publicly, and exclusively
appropriated water from the Angat River without protest from
anyone except until now made by the Secretary of Public
Works. It presents section 14 of ACT 2152 “any person desiring
to appropriate any public water shall previously apply to the
Secretary of Public Works and Communication through the
Director of Public Works.”
 Law of Water of 1866 states the two ways of acquiring right to
use public waters:
1. Administrative concession
2. prescription for 20 years.
- Nowhere in the Irrigation Law that the process in section 14
states that it is exclusive.
- Also Jurisprudence provides that use of public waters can be
acquired through prescription.
- In this case, NAWASA had no need of holding the same
adversely against the National government since the latter
expressly granted it the prior use of the water in question.