There is no right to use the forest right to Pinggu villagers’ government – the rule of law –

A forest right but not the right to use   Pinggu villagers accuse the district government of rule of Law — original title: forest right but not the right to use the Pinggu villagers to the district government newspaper news (reporter Zhang Yu) Pinggu District villagers Lee said he holds the forest warrants, but not the corresponding management of forest and fruit garden. Because the mountain forest right has been the government is indeed the right to another village. Lee so will Pinggu district government to court, asking the court to determine the ownership of the district government illegal behavior. Yesterday, the city court hearing the case in the fourth. It is reported that this is the fourth hospital accepted the case involving the forest right, by the Vice President Hu Cheng as the presiding judge of the trial, Pinggu District vice mayor Wu Lianjiang to participate in the trial. In this case the plaintiff Lee is Pinggu Xiong Er Zhai Xiang Nan woods village. It is said that in 1984, Pinggu district government has granted to its long-term use of forest right certificate and certificate after long-term use of orchard, Pinggu district government and the Pinggu District Forestry Bureau will bear Zhai Xiang Nan woods village forest rights is indeed the right to Xiang Wang Xin Zhuang Wang Xin Zhuang Cun, so he can not continue to operate forest and orchard. The plaintiff that the defendant violated the legitimate rights and interests, so the prosecution to the court, the court ordered the behavior requirements of Pinggu district government illegal. Pinggu district government reply said, because the south forest village poor living conditions, many villagers have moved out of the village, the plaintiff in January 1992 will account from the South Forest Village, there is no actual possession and management of the original forest south mountain village, held by the forest right certificate has expired, the plaintiff and the market does not exist interested, do not have to prosecute the subject qualification, and the prosecution of the plaintiff has exceeded the limitation, so the defendant requested the court to dismiss the plaintiff’s claim. The defendant also mentioned that, in accordance with the relevant provisions of Beijing, rural residents to move out of the original village collective economy no longer enjoy any rights. In addition, the defendant said that the city and the District of Pinggu has issued a renewal, change of forest right certificate of the announcement, but the plaintiff did not within the validity period of renewal of forest warrants. This case is not in court for sentencing.   (: Zhang Yu, commissioning editor Li Jing)相关的主题文章:

This entry was posted in Web Resources. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.