عنوان مقاله [English]
Following the interpretation of the Guardian Council on the principle of 170 of the Constitution in 1383, due to the overcoming of verbal interpretation in the Council, the jurisdiction of the Administrative Justice Court became one of the points of the Islamic Parliament and the Guardian Council. Due to Parliament's insistence on some of its approvals, the Expediency Council also engaged in this dispute that the Assembly also adopted the interstitial decisions. The purpose of this paper is to investigate the effects of the Guardian Council approach to the jurisdiction of the Court and the options of pre-assembly and assembly in the face of the mentioned approach. It should be noted that despite researches done about the limits of the jurisdictions of the Administrative Justice Court, no independent research has been done on this subject. This essay, with a descriptive-analytic method, seeks to identify and evaluate the above options. Based on the findings of this study, the generalization of the Administrative Justice Court to all administrative disputes, although desirable, but it requires constitutional amendment, and in the current situation it may not be expedient. In this situation, with the approval of the Parliament and the approval of the Assembly, deviating from the approach of the Guardian Council and generalizing the jurisdiction of the Administrative Justice Court to the necessary cases enumerated in this article, it seems a more justified option.