The appellant Li Genbao due to seniority approved case
Shanghai second intermediate people's court

Administrative judgment

(2004) Shanghai in line with the word no. 310th

The appellant (the plaintiff) Li Genbao, male, was born in August 7, 1943, Han nationality, retired, lives in this city Meizhou Road 100 Lane 13, room 203.

Attorney: Chen Lansheng, male, born in March 9, 1954, Shanghai Jin Gong electromechanical supply station for the Silver City Road 370, Lane 4, room 2106.

Appellee (defendant in the original instance) Shanghai social security fund settlement management center, home to the city of Zhongshan road 865, 6 floor.

Legal representative in Bao, director of the Shanghai municipal social insurance fund settlement management center.

Attorney: Han Fushan, male, Shanghai social security fund settlement management center staff.

Attorney: Zhang Fang, male, Shanghai City, Yangpu District social insurance management center staff.

The appellant Li Genbao due to seniority approved case, the Shanghai Huangpu District people's Court (2004) yellow Hangchu No. 101st administrative decision, appeal to the court. The court formed a collegial panel, and in 2004 11 month 22 days to conduct a public trial. The appellant and the special authorization agent Li Genbao Chen Lansheng, the Shanghai social security fund settlement management center (hereinafter referred to as the social security fund management center) special authorization agent Han Fushan, Zhang Fang attended the court proceedings. Now the trial has been closed.

The court ruled that, in 2003 June, Li Genbao (Shanghai Hongxing instrument factory) is proposed for Li Genbao to adjust the length of service at the request of the social insurance fund management center, confirmed Li Genbao in 1962 October to August 1967 period of continuous service. Social insurance fund management center approved, Li Genbao will participate in the work time adjustment in 1965 October, and to adjust the 1992 before the end of 27 years of continuous service for 3 months. Li Genbao refuses to accept, continuous service for the social security fund management center approved the 1962 October to 1965 October, he in the street, Li Wei engaged in related work, and receive a living allowance, according to the relevant documents, Li Genbao the experience can be calculated for continuous working age. To this end, in 2003 August, two in December to the Shanghai municipal labor and Social Security Bureau petition. Social security fund management center after receiving Li Genbao petition letter, according to the provisions of relevant documents, combined with the Li Genbao archive material, the length of service of the review, by Li Genbao archive material cannot confirm its 1962 October to 1965 October in the lane and receive the allowance of facts, and Li Genbao is also unable to provide original evidence for the facts prove, the social security fund management center that Li Genbao made a request to lack of evidence, and in March 2, 2004 Li Genbao made a written reply, please calculate continuous service to its request, does not support. Li Genbao refuses to accept this answer, the administrative reconsideration to the Shanghai Municipal Bureau of labor and social security. The Bureau in June 21, 2004 to make Shanghai Labor referendum word (2004) No. twenty-second administrative reconsideration decision, maintain the social insurance fund management center of the specific administrative acts being sued. Li Genbao is still not satisfied, then to the trial court proceedings, requesting revocation of social insurance fund management center.

The court thinks, orgnaization of social security fund management center of the city for the social endowment insurance affairs according to law, with a unified basic old-age insurance business handling, collection, management and payment of endowment insurance fund and other functions. The proposed complaint letter from Li Genbao, Li Genbao proposed that a continuous length of service requirements, review by the review, the Li Genbao made not to recognize the related experience as continuous service reply comments. The specific administrative act that the facts are clear, and according to law. During the 1962 October to 1965 October Li Genbao's experience should be recognized as a continuous length of service requirements, due to record the content of archival material and related documents are not enough to prove, cannot be established. The court verdict: the specific administrative act as continuous service to maintain social security fund management center in March 2, 2004 made to Li Genbao not to recognize its 1962 October to 1965 October. After the verdict, Li Genbao refuses to accept, appeal to the court.

Li Genbao said that the appellant appeals, in 1962 October to 1965 October in the Commission, street work, and receive a monthly allowance. The relevant archival material as well as the street committee, together with the work of the Committee colleagues were confirmed in the. According to the policy, the appellant the period should work in with my time combined with the calculation for continuous service. The respondent in the approved pension, but not the period as the length calculation. Therefore, request the court to revoke the decision of the court and the appellee's reply.

The appellee, social security fund management center, according to the relevant service policy, all the material on the appellant were considered and comprehensive analysis, found that the appellant is the original material, and clearly documented the appellant during 1962 years to 1965 did not enjoy the subsidies, there is no fixed income, is only the obligation to some in the work of the committee. Proof of street appeal issued by the Commission in the no corresponding archival materials are confirmed. The appellant request basis insufficiency, the appellee the reply is not inappropriate, request the court rejected the appellant's appeal, maintain the trial court.

The court examined, the clear in fact finding, the court for confirmation.

This house believes that, according to the Shanghai Municipal Labor Bureau of Shanghai Labor (80) students a word document No. fifty-third "on the street, from the enterprise directly into the cause or district, Bureau as a collective unit staff working on the problem of reply" and "on the downtown streets and collective enterprises, the business unit staff service the handling opinions" provisions, the original subsidies full-time in neighbourhood affairs cadre, into the street and collective enterprises, work, its continuous service from subsidies, specialized in the lane began calculation etc.. From the Li Genbao archives materials, 1965 October before it enters the enterprise material. The labor 1963 registration form does not reflect the work of the Committee in the street once the situation. The 1963 political inventory records "usually can participate in neighbourhood affairs, help street do some voluntary work". Formed after Li Genbao into the enterprise archives in December, except in 1978 to fill out the "employee labor insurance registration card" 1962 year in October to 1965 October reflected in Meizhou street, commissioned when cadres. In 1979 the staff salary upgrade table records in 62 years of work experience, other documents including an application to join the party did not reflect Li Genbao has specialized in the streets, in the committee cadres and allowances etc.. Although Li Genbao provides written confirmation of streets in the Commission and the relevant personnel, but the lack of relevant documents, especially before the 1965 dossier confirmed. The appellee that Li Genbao archive material and I provide the relevant certification materials, with continuous calculation of length of service conditions are not enough to prove that its 1962 October to 1965 October period, there is no improper. The trial court to maintain the specific administrative act, the facts are clear, the applicable law is correct. The appellant Li Genbao appeal, the court shall not support. Therefore, on the basis of "administrative procedure law of the people's Republic of China" article sixty-first (a) the provisions of item, the decision as follows:

Dismiss the appeal, upheld the.

The case acceptance fee of RMB 100 yuan, by the appellant Li Genbao burden.

This judgment is the final judgment.

Chief justice Zhou Hua

Acting judge Ma Haofang

Acting judge Shen Yiping

Two hundred four years in November 25th

The clerk Yao Qianyun

The clerk Zhang Jingyan