The case was ruling
Overview of the case
Plaintiffs Li 1, Li 2, and Li 3 are villagers in Group 5 of Team 2 of a village in HenanThe five groups of villagers have a collective land of about 8 acres in their village. In 1994, 5 groups of villagers and the XX Municipal Administration for Industry and Commerce signed a "XX Farmers' Market Agreement", which stipulated that the municipal government would approve and agree that the two parties would jointly develop and construct the plot for the construction of the farmers' market, and the villagers would give up the land, and the Industrial and Commercial Bureau would be responsible for the construction of greenhouses and other facilities. (The names of the parties are pseudonyms).
In 2001, five groups of villagers, the XX Municipal Administration for Industry and Commerce, and the XX Municipal Market Development Center signed the Agreement, stipulating that on the basis of the original agreement, the XX Municipal Market Development Center would undertake the obligation to pay the share to the five groups of villagers on behalf of the XX Municipal Administration for Industry and Commerce.
Since 2023, the sub-district and other ** departments have repeatedly informed the plaintiff villagers that ** is ready to expropriate the land, but they have not made public the relevant expropriation procedures and resettlement compensation plan. Moreover, on the premise that the expropriation procedure has not been completed, the relevant construction party will directly enter the plot for construction.
Such an unfair and aggressive behavior made the villagers realize that if they did not intervene in time, they would inevitably face greater losses later. As a result, the 34 households in the group (more than two-thirds of the households in the villagers' group) jointly entrusted the three plaintiffs to defend their rights against the expropriation of the land.
The plaintiff and others learned through multi-party consultation and decided to entrust Beijing Henglu Law Firm, which specializes in expropriation and demolition business, to protect their rightsThe law firm assigned lawyer Wen Pinliang, who has rich experience in handling cases, to undertake the case.
Accept the commission
The lawyer understoodThe main demand of the villagers is to keep their land from being expropriated。After conducting in-depth and detailed research on the case materials and conducting several on-site inspections, Henglue's lawyers judged that the expropriation was illegal, and there may even be problems in the relevant approval procedures.
In order to fully understand the expropriation situation and collect sufficient evidence, the lawyer applied for the disclosure of relevant ** information, and received the "Reply" from the municipal people** and the attached "Pre-announcement of Expropriation of Income" and "Survey and Boundary Map" on July 18, 2023.
Sure enough, Henglu's lawyer found that there were many unreasonable and illegal aspects of the above-mentioned pre-announcement of land expropriation:
1. The land expropriation carried out by the people of defendant XX City ** is for commercial development, which is not in the public interest. According to Article 45 of the Land Management Law of the People's Republic of China, the defendant's expropriation of the collective land of the plaintiff and other villagers should be in accordance with the needs of the public interest. The defendant clearly stated in the pre-expropriation announcement that the use of the expropriated land was commercial land, which violated the provisions of the Land Management Law that land expropriation needs to be in the public interest, and the defendant should fully provide evidence of the public interest characteristics of its expropriation work.
2. The people of defendant XX City did not fully listen to the opinions of the land owners and users, and deprived the villagers of their right to know, negotiate and participate. Knowing that the land belonged to the collective ownership of the villagers of Team 2 and Group 5, the defendant had not consulted with the villagers to discuss the necessity of expropriation, the policy and legal basis for expropriation, the planning of specific construction projects, and the resettlement compensation plan for expropriation, taking into account the reasonable and lawful interests and demands of the villagers, and depriving the villagers of their right to know and the right to participate.
To sum up, Henglue argued that the defendant made and published a pre-announcement of the proposed expropriation of the land, preparing to expropriate the collective land owned by the plaintiff's villager group, and the plaintiff was a qualified entity, and the defendant's legitimate interests were harmed by improper purpose and improper procedures in carrying out the above-mentioned administrative acts.
In order to protect its legitimate rights and interests, the plaintiff filed an administrative lawsuit in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Administrative Litigation Law of the People's Republic of ChinaRequest:Revoke the "Pre-announcement of the People's Intention to Expropriate Land of XX City" made and published by the defendant on April 17, 2023The content of "plot six" is involved, and the specific location of the plot is subject to the "Survey and Boundary Map of XXX Batch of Urban Construction Land in XX City".
Case outcome
With the help of Henglue's lawyers, the people of the city finally said under pressure that they would no longer expropriate the land involved in the case, so we withdrew the lawsuit. So far, the villagers have retained the land on which they depend, and their demands have finally been met, and the case has been satisfactorily resolved.
In China, land is an important resource of the state and the basis of the peasants' livelihood. Therefore, land expropriation is a major matter involving national interests and peasants' rights and interests, which cannot be carried out arbitrarily and must follow the procedures and principles prescribed by law.