The effect of the principle of precedence of the jurisdiction of the administrative courts in the realization of justice in France; A look at its implementation in the Iranian administrative law system.

Judicial oversight, and control of administrative decisions, both governmental and non-governmental, is one of the most important pillars in a sound management, according to prevent from encroaching on their oversight powers, oversight should be exercised As a result, the rights of individuals are guaranteed, the duties of officials and public institutions are clarified, and social justice is established. this supervision should be done by a non-executive body, which in France is controlled by the State Council and in the Iranian legal system by the Court of Administrative Justice.Administrative law must move with historical and social developments and based on theories having an independent judge and knowledge of administrative law; There is no need to define the jurisdiction of the Court by law And the judge's hand in determining whether an act is in the public service or not; Be open.Designing thetransfer of authority to handle governmental and non-governmental regulations, including municipalities; Social security, etc. in the Court of Administrative Justice seems to lack a solid foundation. This has adverse consequences, such as the impossibility of decongesting the Court, of appealing the decisions of the General Assembly of the Court, the impossibility of classifying national and local lawsuits, and the impossibility of classifying approvals from the point of view of the issuing institution. However, a look at Iran's comparative administrative law with France shows that approvals in France, contrary to the Iranian legal system, are usually divided into national and local, and The handling of important approvals is also differentiated cases.