نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی
عنوان مقاله English
نویسندگان English
According to paragraph(2) of Article 10 of the Law of the Administrative Court of Justice, handling complaints against definitive decisions of quasi-judicial authorities is absolutely under the authority of this institution. The Commission on the subject of Article 38 of the Municipal Transactions Regulations, despite the quasi-judicial nature, in the unanimous decision No. 2307-2308 dated 4/8/1400 of the General Board of the Court of Administrative Justice and the unanimous decision No. 849 dated 4/19/1403 of the General Board of the Supreme Court to handle complaints from He excluded the opinions of this commission from the jurisdiction of the court and placed them in the jurisdiction of public courts. The investigation showed that excluding this authority from the jurisdiction of the Court is not only against legal principles and standards, but also contradicts the provisions of Article 173 of the Constitution and Clause(2) of Article 10 of the Law of the Court. In short, in paragraph(2) of Article 10, the organizational criterion (being a quasi-judicial authority) is the basis for determining the jurisdiction of the court, but in the aforementioned opinions, the nature of the lawsuits heard in the commission is the criterion for determining the jurisdiction of the court. Based on this, in line with the principle of specialization and documented in Article 10 (2) and Note 3 of Article 3 of the Law of the Court, it was argued that the appeals branches of the Court are the competent authority for protesting the final decisions of the aforementioned commission.
کلیدواژهها English
