The adjusted administrative divisions are designated walk village administrative litigation cases who accepted shall give clear

Author: Xinxiang county court Zhang Jitao Release date: 2008-12-25 09:28:14

   If the people's Court of Xinxiang county is still on trial, the exercise of jurisdiction, to maintain a specific administrative act of judgment, the dispute is unable to be resolved according to law to make specific behavior revoke correcting defective does not belong to the county's management responsibilities, also cannot execute judgment. For example, since 2007, the county municipal court order by the land certificate revocation of 4 cases accepted, although made revocation decision, but the dispute has not been resolved, the prosecution of legitimate rights and interests of the parties can not get timely protection, serious or even cause the parties to Beijing, to the province, city, his petition. According to the Xinxiang county survey, only the last two years, caused by the factors of petition cases up to 10, the court jurisdiction to receive administrative rights not be accepted by provincial petition as 1, to petition as 5. Governance from the source, put forward the following opinions: according to the provisions of the fifth paragraph of "administrative procedure law" twenty-fifth, Xinxiang County People's government to have the qualification of administrative subject in the administrative organ has not been revoked, but due to the adjustment of administrative divisions, the adjustment has not fulfilled its administration of the township, village, has lost administrative powers, shall be regarded as the decomposition of the administrative subject. Xinxiang County People's government administrative area is divided into a plurality of administrative authority to exercise administrative organs, so the government accepted the former Xinxiang county administrative authority as an administrative body to accept the administrative authority, the administrative authority and responsibility and legal liability shall be succeeded by the administrative authority, followed by including the recognition and enforcement of the original has made administrative behavior and the original has been accepted but not yet processed transactions continue to process and make decisions, and to provide legal remedies of administrative misconduct. Therefore shall the zoning adjustment to exercise the power of administrative organs for the defendant. Citizens, or other organizations think that the administrative acts against the legitimate rights and interests of the administrative litigation cases, by zoning adjustment under the jurisdiction of the people's court to accept the administration of the administrative districts. For this purpose: provincial Party committee, the provincial government should be clear as soon as possible after administrative division adjustment is planning to go to the village administrative litigation case accepting unit.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Administrative organs in case the region has no administrative jurisdiction without providing evidence, the specific administrative act is revocable?

Administrative registration of land -- case of Zhang Xiaotang v. XXX people's Government

Author: Anyang City, long an District People's court Li Qunwei Release date: 2009-06-09 16:14:00

Administrative organs in case the region has no administrative jurisdiction without providing evidence, the specific administrative act is revocable?

Administrative registration of land -- case of Zhang Xiaotang v. XXX people's Government

[] hints in the administrative division adjustment, the administrative organ in case the region has no administrative jurisdiction, archival materials in the administrative division adjustment before did not recover and do not provide evidence, the administrative behavior whether to revoke the?

[case]

The plaintiff Zhang Xiaotang

The XXX people's government.

Third Zhang Haohe

XXX people's Government in third Zhang Haohe application, in 1992 October 28 to third people awarded XXX set was built (92) No. 358461st of collective construction land use certificate, the certificate of Henan province according to the "land management law '' implementation measures" provisions, determine the third people can account for the residential area 0.25 acres, occupied area of 415.8 square meters, ultra occupies the area of 215.8 square meters. The people's Government of the XXX within the statutory time limit is not submitted to the court when conducting the specific administrative action evidence, basis.

The plaintiff Zhang Xiaotang claims, 1, the certification that mistake of fact, no third people in Zhang Haohe's personal identification, no origin of land certificates and proof of ownership of the ground attachments, the way is registered in the third witnesses the facts wrong. In 2, the certification process, in the process of use permits no results after the audit announcement, depriving the plaintiff by the objection to correct errors in the registration rights. In 3, the certification acts against the right of the plaintiff, the plaintiff and the third party is neighbor, about 1.1 meters, the plaintiff through third door 7 meters wide road to go out, the third people that the plaintiff can not access the wall, is required by law to revoke the defendant to the collective land for construction of third land use permits issued, (Note: the case for the third wall built to make the import and cannot block, third people sued the civil tort, third people take the collective construction land use permits, the respondent filed during the administrative proceedings in the civil) provide evidence: 1, the plaintiff's own land use certificate; 2, Tang Linming third people the land use certificate copy.

The XXX people's government argues that, because of the adjustment of administrative divisions, the region has the property of XXX jurisdiction, the case has not the administrative jurisdiction, before 2004, the land records basically kept by the village of the township, in 2004 after gradually recover, administrative division of land records of the case before the withdrawal.

Third Zhang Haohe said that, the plaintiff's claim is inconsistent with the facts, should maintain the defendant to the collective land construction land use permits issued. Evidence: the land use certificate file copy, used to demonstrate its hold the certificate of legal.

The trial process, the court on the following evidence to confirm the following: for the plaintiff to provide evidence of 1, 2, the trial the defendant not to express their views on the evidence, third people had no objection to the evidence, can be used as the basis for ascertaining the facts of a case. Provide evidence to support third people, because the evidence the plaintiff to copy, the evidence authenticity demur, the court finds that the evidence does not meet "the Supreme People's court" on some issues of administrative litigation evidence requirements of article tenth.

The court found, in October 28, 1992, the people's Government of Henan Province on the basis of "XXX '' approach to the implementation of land management law" provisions of article forty-eighth, the third were awarded the collective construction land use permit. The license, plain area of cultivated land per capita a mus of above, can account for the curtilage base area of 0.25 mu, the occupied area of 415.8 square meters, ultra occupies the area of 215.8 square meters. The plaintiff accused for certification act third facts are not clear, the illegal procedure, violations of the legitimate rights and interests of the plaintiff, went to the hospital.

Another investigation, the case involving the archival materials in divisions adjusted the defendant should be handed over to the authorities but not over.

Trial.

The court heard that the defendant: within the statutory time limit is not submitted to the specific administrative action evidence, basis, in violation of the "administrative procedure law of the people's Republic of China" forty-third of "the defendant shall be in receipt of a copy of the indictment within 10 days from the date of the people's court to submit relevant materials" specific administrative behavior, as well as the "Supreme People's Court on the implementation of 'of the people's Republic of China Administrative Procedure Law' interpretation of several issues" twenty-sixth of "the defendant does not provide or unwarranted overdue provided, shall be identified the specific administrative act is not evidence, basis". Therefore, find the defendant to the collective land for construction of third land use permits issued no evidence, basis, shall be revoked in accordance with the. In accordance with the "administrative procedure law of the people's Republic of China" fifty-fourth second first order rules, the judgments are as follows:

To revoke the defendant XXX people's Government in October 28, 1992 as the third issued by the Zhang Haohe XXX set construction (92) No. 358461st of collective construction land use permit.

After the first trial of third people Zhang Haohe dissatisfied, to appeal to the intermediate people's court.

The appellant Zhang Haohe Appeal said the first defendant XXX people's government is not within the statutory time limit to submit evidence, but there are legitimate reasons not provided, and as the first third people to the court of first instance to the land use certificate file copy, proof certification legitimate. The appellant Zhang Haohe did not violate the appellee Zhang Xiaotang's legitimate rights and interests, and the plaintiff has ultra limitation. Request to withdraw the first instance judgment.

The appellee Zhang Xiaotang main defence prosecution not super aging, XXX government did not within the statutory time limit of burden of proof, the court revoked the issuance of land certificates in accordance with the law.

The first defendant XXX people's Government reply said the XXX government belong to case region has no jurisdiction, the case of land records in did not recover my unit of administrative division adjustment, adjustment does not exist in the transfer of files, I units do not provide evidence is justified. A trial because of my unit failed to provide evidence and the revocation of the certificate of land belong to the improper v..

The second instance court found in the first instance consistent. In the case of first instance by the plaintiff Zhang Xiaotang v. X set construction (92) No. 358461st of collective construction land use permit card unit is XXX people's government, although after the adjustment of administrative division refers to the jurisdiction of a land area, but the specific administrative act certification completed in the adjustment of administrative divisions, XXX the people's government is still applicable defendants in the case, the region has no jurisdiction, archival material as if it fails to provide evidence for no legal basis in the administrative division adjustment without back. The appellant Zhang Haohe and Zhang Xiaotang things adjacent, XXX government for the collective land construction Zhang Haohe issued land use certificate to determine the size of the right to use non aggression while Zhang Xiaotang's homestead, but a legal interest in Zhang Xiaotang as the adjacent relation party and individual behavior, the appellant Zhang Haohe believes that the plaintiff has ultra limitation and the disputed land do not infringe upon the legitimate rights and interests of the appellee Zhang Xiaotang claims, lack of reason, does not support. The judgment that the facts clearly, applicable laws, regulations, in accordance with the law shall be maintained. According to the "administrative litigation law of the people's Republic of China" article sixty-first (a) the provisions of item, the decision as follows: rejecting the appeal, upheld the.

[comments]

The focus of the case is the XXX of the people's Government of the specific administrative act has been undertaken in this case is the proper defendant, the adjustment of administrative cases, the region has no longer the exercise of administrative jurisdiction and do not provide evidence, how to review the problems with the third land use certificate file copies.

One, the defendant. In this case the defendant is proper, can be reviewed from the following two aspects, one is in accordance with the relevant provisions of the land management law ": peasants collectively all of the land for non-agricultural construction, made by the people's government at the county level shall register, issue certificates to confirm the right to use land for construction". Therefore, although the defendants in 1992 on 28 October third issue of collective construction land use permits, administrative region involved in the case made an adjustment in the administrative divisions, the defendant is not entitled to the administrative jurisdiction of the region, but the people's government administrative behavior of XXX third issued a collective land for construction use permits are made in the administrative division adjustment before, in the adjustment of administrative divisions, the administrative behavior has come to an end; two is based on the "specified in the first paragraph of the administrative procedure law of the people's Republic of China" twenty-fifth: citizens, legal persons or other organizations directly file a lawsuit to the people's court to undertake a specific administrative act, the administrative organ shall be the defendant. In this case the plaintiff Zhang Xiaotang v. X set construction (92) No. 358461st of collective construction land use permit card unit is XXX people's government, although after the adjustment of administrative division refers to the jurisdiction of a land area, but the specific administrative act certification completed in administrative division adjustment before. As a result of the case is an administrative act issued land use certificate is legal action, determined in accordance with the defendant in administrative litigation should follow the who acts, who accused the principle, XXX people's government should be the proper defendant.

Two, the defendant should regularly provide evidence. The defendants in 1992 on 28 October third issue of collective construction land use permits, the certification unit of certification basis material has custody obligations and legal responsibilities. The defendant argued that in the case of land archives themselves did not recover, while the township custody, administrative divisions adjusted the plots due to draw XX County jurisdiction without transfer received files, and thus cannot provide evidence within the statutory time limit, the reason is the internal management question, can not be used as justification for the burden of proof is not on schedule, should be regarded as the defendant in the case of land archives still has custody. The defendant within the statutory time limit not to submit to the court to undertake a specific administrative act, on the basis of evidence, in violation of the "administrative procedure law of the people's Republic of China" forty-third of "the defendant shall be received in a copy of the indictment of a people's court within 10 days to submit relevant materials" to make concrete administrative behavior, and "the Supreme People's Court on the implementation of 'of the people's Republic of China Administrative Procedure Law' interpretation of several issues" twenty-sixth of "the defendant does not provide or unwarranted overdue provided, shall be determined according to the provisions, no evidence of" specific administrative act. Zhang Haohe as a trial although third people during the trial of the first instance provides the land use certificate file copy, but the plaintiff of the evidence authenticity demur, can not fully prove the validity of the XXX people's government certification.

To sum up, the administrative organ in case the region has no administrative jurisdiction, archival materials in the administrative division adjustment before did not recover and do not provide evidence, shall be deemed the collective land for construction of third land use permits issued no evidence, basis, shall be revoked in accordance with the. (the names of the parties are a pseudonym