The Administrative Court of Justice, as the creator of the administrative judicial order in the Islamic Republic of Iran, plays an unparalleled role in developing the principles of administrative law and respecting human and citizen rights in administrative procedures. Among the jurisdictions of the Administrative Court of Justice is the examination of final decisions issued by specialized administrative authorities, which also includes the decisions of the Commission of Article 100 of the Municipalities Law. Also, according to legal stipulation, one of the requirements for filing a complaint and protest in the Administrative Court is the concept of the plaintiff being a "beneficiary". Since examining existing judicial practice can help to better understand the subject and its conceptual developments in the legal system, in this study, using a descriptive-analytical and library method, we seek to answer the question: What was the practice of the General Board of the Court of Administrative Justice regarding the concept of the plaintiff being intersted in protesting the decisions of the Commission of Article 100 of the Municipalities Law? The research findings indicate that the uniform judicial precedents of the General Assembly generally confirm the relatively narrow practice of the concept of interested party in the Court's branches, but some opinions, including uniform judicial precedent No. 115 dated 2013,05,13 can be considered as a basis for a revolution in the concept of interested party in protest against the opinions of the Article 100 Commission. This is possible if we move towards accepting the general concept of the "intersted" in administrative lawsuits by accepting "public interest claims" in the jurisprudence of the Administrative Court of Justice or in law reforms.