Background and Aim: Supervision of the votes of the Article 100 Municipal Commission is of great significance due to the guarantee of the implementation of the commission and also the connection with important urban regulations. In this paper, an attempt has been made to study how the Court of Administrative Justice supervises the commission in question.
Findings: The Court of Administrative Justice supervises the jurisdiction and procedure of the Article 100 Commission of the Municipal Law, both formally and substantively. The Court assesses the decisions of the Article 100 Commission with regard to violations or opposition to laws and regulations. What can be deduced from the procedure of the Court of Administrative Justice in monitoring the opinions of the Commission is the attention to the violated personal right and the implementation of private law criteria, the necessity of direct and personal interest and the narrow perception of direct interest, which conflicts with the nature of the commission's litigation that is a clear example of public litigation.
Conclusion: The supervision of the Administrative Court of Justice over the Article 100 Commission is facing a significant weakness. It is not possible to regard only the builder as a beneficiary and not to give rights to others, because by wrong action and sometimes with the malice of each one, destructive impacts on the urban life and the basic rights of the citizens are resulted.