Decision 4 G.R. No. 201273 therein. The action[ s] for reversion, annulment of documents and cancellation of titles are rights of actions or reliefs which are obviously neither within the exclusive nor concurrent jurisdiction of the NCIP. It further asserted that it was never made a party to NCIP En Banc Resolution No. 060-2009-AL (2009). Not being a party to the proceeding, it could not avail of the remedy of filing a petition for review with the CA. The Republic maintained that the CAL T and the consequent OCT was null and void. As such, they can be attacked either directly [or] collaterally. The RTC, however, was not at all persuaded by Republic's arguments and rendered the now challenged Order dismissing the complaint. It sustained private respondents that the RTC has no jurisdiction over the subject matter of the complaint. The R TC explained that the CALT and the corresponding OCT were issued on the basis of the Resolution 0602009-AL of the NCIP. Thus, any challenge against the CALT and the OCT necessarily calls for a review of the NCIP Resolution which was made as basis for the issuance of the CALT. However, NCIP is a quasi-judicial body with a rank and stature equal to that of the RTC; hence, it cannot review the Resolution of the NCIP or any document that flows from its proceedings. The RTC disposed, thus: WHEREFORE, the instant case is disblissed without prejudice for lack of jurisdiction over the subjectmatter of the complaint. SO ORDERED. 6 Petitioner filed a motion for reconsideration but the RTC denied this. Aggrieved, petitioner filed a petition for certiorari under Rule 65 with the CA. 7 CA Decision On the procedural issue, the CA ruled that petitioner availed itself of the correct remedy when it filed a Rule 65 petition to assail the RTC's dismissal without prejudice of the Complaint. 8 The CA ruled that the Complaint assails the validity of OCT No. 0-CALT-37 as well as NCIP En Banc Resolution No. 060-2009-AL, Series of 2009 9 (Resolution No. 0602009-AL). Given this, the RTC does not have jurisdiction to review the NCIP Resolution as under the Indigenous Peoples Rights Act of 1997 10 (IPRA), its Implementing Rules and Regulations (IRR), and even the NCIP Rules on Pleadings, Practice and Procedure all state that Decisions of the NCIP are reviewable by the CA. 11 For the CA, the NCIP and the RTC are co-equal bodies and the NCIP is therefore beyond the control of the RTC. 12 6 7 9 IO 11 12 Rollo (Vol. I), pp. 99-104. Id. at 98, 105. Id. at 107-108. Id. at 150-163. Republic Act No. 8371, entitled "AN ACT TO RECOGNIZE, PROTECT AND PROMOTE TI-IE RIGHTS OF INDIGENOUS CULTURAL COMMUNITIES/INDIGENOUS PEOPLES, CREATING A NATIONAL COMMISSION ON INDIGENOUS PEOPLES, ESTABLISHING IMPLEMENTING MECHANISMS, APPROPRIATING FUNDS THEREFOR, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES," October 29, I 997. Rollo (Vol. I), pp. 109-111. Id. at 111.