Xuan Yicheng and Other 17 Persons v. Qǘzhou Land and Resource Bureau (Case of Administrative Disputes over Withdrawal of Right to Use Land)@#
@#
@# BASIC FACTS@#
Plaintiffs: Xuan Yicheng and other 17 persons (name list omitted)@# Litigant representative: Xuan Yicheng, dweller of Weining Alley, Kecheng District, Qǘzhou, Zhejiang Province@# Litigant representative: Chenggang, dweller of Weining Alley, Kecheng District, Qǘzhou, Zhejiang Province@# Litigant representative: Yu Genfeng, dweller of Weining Alley, Kecheng District, Qǘzhou, Zhejiang Province@# Litigant representative: Sun Zeyong, dweller of Weining Lane, Kecheng District, Qǘzhou, Zhejiang Province@# Litigant representative: Dai Zhiqiang, dweller of Weining Lane, Kecheng District, Qǘzhou, Zhejiang Province@# Defendant: Zhejiang Qǘzhou Land and Resource Bureau, Address: Kecheng District, Qǘzhou, Zhejiang Province@# Legal Representative: Huang Changyu, Director-general of the Bureau@# The Third Party: Qǘzhou Branch of China Construction Bank, Address: Kecheng District, Qǘzhou, Zhejiang Province@# Legal Representative: Chen Genhai, director of the Branch@# On December 31, 2002, Zhejiang Qǘzhou Land and Resource Bureau (hereinafter referred to as the Land and Resource Bureau), the defendant, gave Xuan Yicheng and other 17 plaintiffs a Notice on Withdrawal of Right to Use the State-owned Land (No. 37 [2002]), stating that “In accordance with the Land Administration Law of the People's Republic of China (hereinafter referred to as the Land Administration Law), the Measures of Zhejiang Province for Implementing the Land Administration Law of the People's Republic of China and the relevant provisions, the right to use the state-owned land of the residential houses of all plaintiffs at Weining Lane, Kecheng District will be withdrawn, Qǘzhou Branch of China Construction Bank (hereinafter referred to as Qǘzhou Branch of the CCB), the third party, will be responsible for the demolition compensations and the demolition office will be responsible for the matters relevant to the demolition. The right to use the state-owned land of the residential houses registered upon application of all plaintiffs will be cancelled. The land certificates when signing the demolition compensation agreements shall be handed back”. Xuan Yicheng et al refused to accept the decision of the Land and Resource Bureau, so they lodged an administrative lawsuit in Kecheng District People's Court, Qǘzhou, Zhejiang Province on April 4, 2003.@# ...... | | 宣懿成等18人诉衢州市国土资源局收回土地使用权行政争议案@# 【裁判摘要】@# 行政机关在依法实施具体行政行为时,仅说明所依据的法律名称,没有说明依据的具体法律条款,且不能证明其具体行政行为符合法律的哪些具体规定,构成违法,应予撤销。@# @# 原告:宣懿成等18人(名单略)。@# 诉讼代表人:宣懿成,浙江省衢州市柯城区卫宁巷居民。@# 诉讼代表人:程钢,浙江省衢州柯城区卫宁巷居民。@# 诉讼代表人:余根凤,浙江省衢州市柯城区卫宁巷居民。@# 诉讼代表人:孙则勇,浙江省衢州市柯城区卫宁巷居民。@# 诉讼代表人:戴志强,浙江省衡州市柯城区新开弄居民。@# 被告:浙江省衢州市国土资源局,住所地:浙江省衢州市柯城区。@# 法定代表人:黄昌煜,该局局长。@# 第三人:中国建设银行衢州市分行。住所地:浙江省衢州市柯城区。@# 法定代表人:陈根海,该分行行长。@# 2002年12月31日,被告浙江省衢州市国土资源局(以下简称国土局)作出衢市国土(2002)第37号《收回国有土地使用权通知书》,通知宣懿成等18名原告:根据《中华人民共和国土地管理法》(以下简称土地管理法)、《浙江省实施<中华人民共和国土地管理法>办法》及有关规定,将收回各原告在柯城区卫宁巷住宅的国有土地使用权,收回中涉及的拆迁补偿事宜由第三人中国建设银行衢州市分行(以下简称建设银行衢州分行)负责,具体拆迁事务由有关拆迁事务所负责。原由各原告申请登记的住宅国有土地使用权予以注销,并请在签订拆迁补偿协议时将土地证交回。宣懿成等18名原告不服国土局的决定,于2003年4月4日向浙江省衢州市柯城区人民法院提起行政诉讼。@# 原告诉称:我们是衢州市柯城区卫宁巷衢州府山中学教工宿舍楼的住户。2003年1月,因为第三人建设银行衢州分行建造车库需要用地,被告陆续向我们发出《收回国有土地使用权通知书》。但仅仅因为企业建造车库的需要,被告就作出收回我们国有土地使用权的决定,显然不符合土地管理法第五十八条的规定,请求撤销被告的行政行为。@# 原告提供的证据有:@# 1.衢州市国土局(2002)37号《收回国有土地使用权通知书》18份,用以证明该局于2002年12月31日向各原告分别作出了收回国有土地使用权的决定。@# 2.国有土地使用证18份,用以证明各原告均是衢州市柯城区卫宁巷衢州府山中学教工宿舍楼的住户,并依法享有国有土地的使用权。@# 被告辩称:我局根据衢州市发展计划委员会(2002)35号《关于同意扩建营业用房项目建设计划的批复》、衢州市规划局(2002)浙规证0800109号《建设用地规划许可证》,并依据土地管理法的规定,经报请衢州市人民政府批准,同意收回衢州市区卫宁巷地段原居民住宅用地187.5平方米,用于第三人建设银行衢州分行扩建。该收回土地行政行为事实清楚,适用法律正确,符合法定程序。第三人扩建用地是经有批准权的人民政府批准的,既是公共利益需要使用土地,也是实施城市规划需要使用土地,有关决定不存在依据不足、行为违法的事实。@# ...... |