Beijing Yingtong Law Firm has focused on the protection of the rights and interests of private enterprises for many years. It has represented many corporate rights protection cases in the legal practice of rights protection in natural resources, mining, land, waters, territorial space, corporate equity, criminal defense, factory demolition, environmental protection shutdown, prohibition and vacation, etc., including large-scale real estate...
Home page >> Classic case >> administrative agreement
Article author:Yingting Lawyers Group | Update time:2026-04-29 | Reading times:208
[Key points of the case]
After a building materials company in Xinjiang submitted an application for a construction waste disposal license, it received a "cold treatment" from the county and urban management bureau: it neither informed them at once whether the materials were complete, nor made a decision on whether to accept or reject the application within the legal time limit. After the company complained through the special action platform for enterprise-related administrative law enforcement, the county governmentAdministrative Law Enforcement Supervision BureauIntervened in the investigation and determined that the bureau violated the provisions of the Administrative Licensing Law on time limit processing and one-time notification, which constituted administrative inaction, and issued the "Administrative Licensing Law"Administrative law enforcement supervision opinion letter》Ordering rectification within a time limit.
Lawyer Ying Ting pointed out that "silence" in administrative licensing is not acquiescence, but a typical procedural violation. After receiving the application, the administrative agency must fulfill its notification obligations and make a clear decision within the statutory time limit, otherwise it will infringe on the legitimate rights and interests of the enterprise. In this case, the Urban Management Bureau quickly corrected its mistakes under the pressure of supervision, accepted the application and passed the permit in accordance with the law, which reflects the key role of administrative law enforcement supervision in optimizing the business environment.
This case serves as a warning to all administrative approval departments: the implementation of the "one-time notification" and "time-limited processing" systems is a basic requirement of a law-based government, and any delay and shirk will face accountability. When enterprises encounter difficulties in getting things done and slow approvals, they should make good use of administrative law enforcement supervision, the 12345 hotline and other channels to protect their rights, forcing administrative agencies to improve service efficiency, so that "more data travels and less companies travel" can truly be implemented.
The County Government Administrative Law Enforcement Supervision Bureau inquired about the situation from relevant personnel of the building materials company and the County and City Administration Bureau. After investigation and verification, the county and city management bureau failed to fulfill its one-time notification obligation after receiving the enterprise's administrative licensing application, and failed to decide whether to accept or not accept the application within the statutory time limit. This violated the relevant provisions of the "Administrative Licensing Law of the People's Republic of China" on the processing of administrative licensing applications, and constituted administrative inaction. The County Government Administrative Law Enforcement Supervision Bureau issued the "Administrative Law Enforcement Supervision Opinion", ordering the County Urban Management Bureau to perform its statutory duties within a time limit. Based on the supervision opinions, the County and City Administration Bureau conscientiously performed its duties, accepted and approved the enterprise's application for a construction waste disposal license in accordance with the law, and the problem was properly resolved.
Previous article:Protect the legitimate rights and interests of private enterprises! The Supreme People's Court releases 10 typical cases