[Case Summary]This case involves an administrative lawsuit over the registration of land contractual management rights. In 2018, Zhang Dashan, a villager from Shuguang Village in Hebei Province, legally obtained a "Rural Land Contractual Management Right Certificate" confirming his contractual rights to 15.1 mu of cultivated land. However, in April 2022, he discovered that 12.76 mu of this land had been re-registered and certified by the A County government to Zhao Quanhe, a fellow villager, resulting in a situation of "one piece of land with two certificates". Zhang Dashan subsequently entrusted the Beijing Henglu Law Firm to handle the legal dispute on his behalf.Hao XinfengThe lawyer filed a lawsuit, and the Intermediate People's Court of Zhangjiakou City ruled to revoke the land contract management rights certificate issued to Zhao Quanhe. The core disputes are the legality of the county government's issuance of the certificate, the nature of the case, and the true ownership of the contractual rights. The applicable legal provisions are Article 48 Paragraph 2 of the Implementing Rules of the Interim Regulations on Real Estate Registration.

I. Review of the case facts

"What should I do if I have two certificates for the same piece of land?" "Can the land contract management right certificate be revoked if it's registered under someone else's name?" "Do I still have the right to contract land if I move my household registration out of the village?" These are frequently asked questions by rural land rights holders. Zhang Dashan, a member of the collective economic organization of Shuguang Village, obtained the "People's Republic of China Rural Land Contract Management Right Certificate" in accordance with the law as early as 2018, confirming his right to contract 15.1 mu of cultivated land in the village (certificate code 13XXXXXXXXXXXXX25J).

In April 2022, Zhang Dashan was shocked to find that among the 15.1 mu of land under his name, as many as 12.76 mu had been re-registered and confirmed by the People's Government of A County and a land contracting management right certificate (code 13XXXXXXXXXXXXX29J) had been issued to Zhao Quanhe, a villager in the same village. The existence of two legal contracting management right certificates for the same piece of land seriously damaged Zhang Dashan's rights and interests. After repeatedly reporting the matter to the town and county governments without success, he entrusted a lawyer with extensive experience in administrative law and land disputes to handle the case for him.\nHao XinfengThe lawyer filed a lawsuit with the Intermediate People's Court of Zhangjiakou City.

II. The focus of the case

  • Focus 1: The legality of the A County government issuing the certificate to Zhao Quanhe.Is there sufficient factual and legal basis for this certification action?
  • Focus II: The debate over the nature of the case.Is this case a land ownership dispute that requires the government to handle it first?
  • Focus 3: The true ownership of land contracting rights.Who owns the legal contractual management rights to the 12.76 mu of land between Zhang Dashan and Zhao Quanhe?

III. The professional intervention of Hengluo Law Firm

The plaintiff claimed that:Zhang Dashan argued that he has been farming for several decades and obtained the contractual management rights certificate in accordance with the law, which is legal and valid and should be protected; Zhao Quan's household registration was moved out of Shuguang Village in 2007, and he lost his collective membership status and should no longer enjoy contractual rights; the county government issued a certificate to Zhao in 2022 allowing him to hold multiple plots of land, which violates the principle of "registration of the contract first", and therefore requested the revocation of Zhao's rights certificate.

The defendant (A County Government) argued that:The "one place, two certificates" situation was caused by the village committee's work mistakes; the essence of this case is a dispute over land ownership between Zhang Dashan and Zhao Quan. The government should handle it first, and the plaintiff's direct lawsuit lacks legal basis, so it should be dismissed. The county government issued the certificate to Zhao based on the second-round contracting rights actually obtained by Zhao's father in 1998, which is not without legal basis. It admitted that the problem has not been properly resolved due to the long time elapsed.

The third party, Zhao Quan, stated the following:It was claimed that Zhang Dashan only moved back to his hometown in 1995 and did not obtain the land adjustment in 1994. In 1998, under the "no adjustment" policy, he still did not obtain the contracting rights. The land involved in the case was registered for contracting by his father on behalf of the family in 1994. Zhang Dashan used to cultivate the land based on temporary transfer, not the transfer of contracting rights, so he had no right to claim it.

Hengluo Lawyer's Agency Opinion:Hao XinfengThe lawyer submitted Zhang Dashan's contracted operation rights certificate, tax payment certificate, materials for surveying and mapping of overlapping plots, evidence of Zhao Quanhe's household registration transfer, and records of the agricultural bureau's file inquiry (which failed to find any information related to Zhao), etc., to demonstrate that the plaintiff's contracted rights are legal, that Zhao Quanhe has lost his membership rights, and that the county government's issuance of two certificates for the same land violates basic principles and infringes on the plaintiff's rights. The lawyer pointed out that the defendant, on the one hand, admitted the existence of a land ownership dispute, but on the other hand, failed to provide evidence that third parties applied for ownership registration with the contractor holding the contract, and that the main evidence for the issuance of the certificate was insufficient.

IV. Outcome of the case

The court held that the defendant, the A County Government, registered the ownership of the 12.76 mu of arable land in question to Zhang Dashan and Zhao Quanhe, resulting in a dispute over ownership of the same land with two certificates. The registration of land contractual management rights is one of the causes of administrative litigation accepted by the people's court in accordance with the law. According to Article 48 Paragraph 2 of the Implementing Regulations of the Interim Regulations on Real Estate Registration, the first registration of land contractual management rights obtained by household contracting shall be applied for by the contractor with materials such as the land contractual management contract; the defendant failed to provide evidence that the third party applied for the registration of ownership with the contractor holding the contractual management contract and other materials, and the administrative act of registering and issuing certificates of land ownership for the third party lacked main evidence and should be revoked according to law. The judgment revoked the "Rural Land Contractual Management Right Certificate" issued by the A County Government to Zhao Quanhe, and the litigation acceptance fee shall be borne by the defendant.

5. Henglu Law Firm's Reminder

The essence of the "one land, two certificates" problem is that the land use and ownership are unclear. The government needs to re-survey the boundaries to clarify the nature of the land and then determine the ownership, so that there will be a basis for adjudicating civil disputes. In this case,\nHao XinfengAttorney (Practice Certificate No.: 11101200310205100, subject to the certificate issued by the judicial administrative organ): Reminder: In the event of land ownership disputes, you should first apply to the government for rights confirmation before taking legal action, so as to avoid wasting time and effort on blind litigation. When necessary, you should promptly seek the intervention of professional lawyers and adhere to the bottom line of land protection.

VI. Common Questions and Answers about Land Acquisition and Demolition Cases

  1. Q: What should I do if I have two certificates for the same place?
    A: You can sue to revoke the incorrectly issued land contract management rights certificate, or first apply for government confirmation of ownership, and then have the government re-survey and determine the ownership before handling the matter.
  2. Q: Can the land contract management right certificate, which is registered under someone else's name, be revoked?
    A: Yes. If the main evidence for the issuance of the certificate is insufficient (such as the lack of materials proving the ownership of the contractor when applying for the certificate), the party concerned may request the court to revoke the certificate by judgment.
  3. Q: Do I still enjoy the right to contract land after my household registration has been transferred out?
    A: Generally, if an individual moves out of the collective economic organization of the village, they will lose their membership status and no longer enjoy the right to contract and operate land, except under certain circumstances during the contract period.
  4. Q: How can the land contracting rights be verified?
    A: The contract signed in accordance with the law and the land contract management right certificate issued by the government shall prevail. The tax payment certificate, surveying and mapping materials, and file inquiries can be used as supplementary evidence.
  5. Q: Is it necessary to let the government handle land ownership disputes first?
    A: Land contracting and management rights registration cases are administrative litigation cases, and can be directly sued; pure ownership disputes generally require first applying to the government for title confirmation.