(20 16) Chongqing 15 line Chu No.39
The plaintiff Xixian Longhu Office listened to the villagers' group of Erlizhuang in Huaiqiao Community.
Niu Guangyou, litigation representative; Duan Dehua,; Niu Guangyi, both are:.
Defendant Xixian County People's Government.
Authorized Agent: Zhang Tao, legal worker of Xixian 148 Legal Service Office.
Legal Representative: Zhao Junfeng, county magistrate.
Authorized Agent: Zhang Jun, staff member of Longhu Office in Xixian County.
Authorized Agent: XX Gang, lawyer of Henan Tongxin Law Firm.
The plaintiff, Longhu Office in Xixian County, confirmed that the defendant, Xixian County Government, illegally expropriated the plaintiff's 294.2 mu of land on June 7, 20061kloc-0/7, and filed a lawsuit with our court on March 6, 2006. On April 5, 20 16, our hospital filed a case, and served the defendant with a copy of the complaint and a notice of responding to the lawsuit on April 8. A collegiate bench was formed in our hospital according to law, and the trial was held in public on July 14, 2004. Niu Guangyou, Duan Dehua and Niu Guangyi, the plaintiff's agents ad litem, and Zhang Tao, their entrusted agents, and Zhang Jun and XX, the defendant's entrusted agents, attended the proceedings in court, and the trial has now been completed.
According to the original report, on June 5438+065438+ 10/7, 2006, the defendant Xixian county government expropriated and developed the plaintiff's village group's land No.294.2, and the compensation price was 23,000 yuan per mu. At that time, it promised to provide the plaintiff's villagers' group with subsistence allowances, natural gas facilities to households, a facade room for every two people, and to apply for state-owned land use certificates and real estate licenses free of charge. Later, the defendant transferred the land to Xixian Joy Real Estate Co., Ltd. for real estate development, and now 42 buildings have been built. Now the development and construction are drawing to a close, but the defendant has not fulfilled his promise. The plaintiff and villagers have repeatedly reported to the relevant departments, but they have not been resolved. The plaintiff sued for confirmation that it was illegal for the defendant to requisition the land of the plaintiff's village group. The plaintiff submitted the following evidence: ① There are 6 photos of 42 buildings on the plaintiff's land, which prove the present situation of the land. (2) Reply on the land expropriation in Erlizhuang, which proves that the plaintiff's 38 mu homestead and 14 mu land on the west side of the reservoir were expropriated. (3) Letter of commitment from Joy Real Estate Co., Ltd., which proves that it promised to handle the formalities of quasi-building permit for the plaintiff and completed them within 65438+2 months. (4) The civil ruling of Xixian People's Court, which proves that the land acquisition, residents' signatures and nine items are clear. ⑤ The land expropriation contract and the expropriation contract bear the seal of Xixian suburban township government and the signature of the township head, which proves that the defendant failed to honor his promise.
The defendant argued that the land involved was legally expropriated, and the compensation for land resettlement and the compensation for attachments on the ground had all been paid to the plaintiff villagers; The plaintiff's lawsuit has exceeded the statutory time limit and requests to dismiss the plaintiff's claim. The defendant submitted the following evidence: ① Yu Zheng Tu (20 13) No.76; ② New Journey (2013) No.87; ③ Xixian People's Government and Henan Joy Real Estate Co., Ltd. signed the Road Construction Agreement for the East Section of Qiaolou Street; (4) Land expropriation contract (proof by plaintiff in civil litigation); ⑤ Decision on Administrative Punishment of Xixian Land and Resources Bureau; 6. Confiscation of bills. The above evidence proves that the plot was built without approval and has been punished. ⑦ Civil ruling; Today the plaintiff's complaint materials; Pet-name ruby petition materials. It is proved that the land claimed by the plaintiff in the petition and civil litigation is 2 14 mu, but the defendant actually occupied 193.85438+05 mu in this case, and compensated the plaintiff.
After cross-examination in court, the plaintiff has no objection to the authenticity of the evidence submitted by the defendant, and has objection to the purpose of proof of evidence ① ⑧; The defendant objected to the relevance of the evidence submitted by the plaintiff; The authenticity of evidence ⑤ is disputed, and the others are not disputed. We believe that the evidence submitted by the defendant and the evidence ①-④ submitted by the plaintiff can be used as the basis for determining the facts of this case.
It was found through trial that on July 6, 2006, the defendant Xixian County Government signed the Road Construction Agreement for the East Section of Qiaolou Street with Henan Joy Real Estate Co., Ltd., and the defendant provided Qiaoqiao Company with 200 mu of state-owned land on the condition that Qiaoqiao Company was responsible for investing in the new 1450 m road and supporting facilities in the east section of Qiaolou Street. In June of the same year, 5438+065438+ 10, the project of Joy Company was basically completed. The former suburban township government of Xixian signed a land acquisition contract with the plaintiff and villagers, and obtained the parcel at a price of 23,000 yuan per mu and delivered it to Joy Company. Joy Company carried out real estate development and construction on June 5438+065438+ 10, 2007. 20 10 65438+ 10. On October 6th, Xixian Land and Resources Bureau imposed an administrative penalty on the construction of No.1 Bridge Company without approval, and then fulfilled the examination and approval procedures for the parcel. On October 20th, 2065438+200365438+/kloc-0, the government of Henan Province issued the Reply on the Land Requisitioned for the First Batch of Urban Construction in Xixian County in 2065438+2002, and approved the parcel as urban construction land.
Our opinion is that Article 41 of the Supreme People's Court's Interpretation on Several Issues Concerning the Implementation of the Administrative Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China stipulates that "if an administrative organ fails to inform a citizen, a legal person or any other organization that it has the right to appeal or the time limit for prosecution when it makes a specific administrative act, the time limit for prosecution shall be counted from the date when the citizen makes the specific administrative act, and the legal person or any other organization knows or should know the right to appeal or the time limit for prosecution, but the longest time limit shall not exceed 2 years from the date when it knows or should know the content of the specific administrative act". In June 2006, 165438+ 10, the former suburban township government of Xixian county signed a land acquisition contract with the plaintiff villagers, and paid a compensation of 23,000 yuan per mu, which was recognized by the plaintiff in court. It can be concluded that the plaintiff knew the contents of the administrative act at that time and filed a lawsuit on March 20 16 16, which exceeded the statutory time limit. According to the second paragraph of Article 3 of the Supreme People's Court's Interpretation on Several Issues Concerning the Application of the Administrative Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China, the ruling is as follows:
Reject the plaintiff's claim from the villagers' group in Erlizhuang, Tinghuaiqiao Community, Longhu Office, Xixian County.
50 yuan, the acceptance fee of this case, shall be borne by the plaintiff village group.
If you refuse to accept this ruling, you can submit an appeal to our court within ten days from the date of delivery of the ruling, and submit copies according to the number of the other parties to appeal to the Henan Higher People's Court.