Municipality

Background: Article 5 Commission of Iran’s Supreme Council for Urban Development and Architecture is a quasi-judicial authority that has a close connection with the rights of citizens. It has composed a part of the claims that most of the related lawsuits are of great importance with great amounts. There is a certain procedure for the authorities, such as the Dispute Resolution Council, which deals with claims under 20 million toman, but unfortunately, for there is no such a procedure for important cases of municipal commissions, including Article 5 Commission. Therefore, according to Article 170 of the Constitution, natural or legal entities may request the annulment of the matter against governmental and municipal regulations in the General Board of the Court. In this respect, the owners whose rights are not observed in accordance with the rules and regulations can complain to the Supreme Council's decisions in the General Board of the Court and thereby request the annulment of the Article 5 Commission’s approvals. Methodology and Objective: In the present article, the authors will review the annulment of the approvals of Article 5 Commission of Iran’s Supreme Council for Urban Development and Architecture by the Administrative Justice Court, using an analytical-descriptive research methodology as a library study through note-making method. Findings and Conclusions: In the review of the annulled approvals, it can be found that failure to observe the proprietary and the acquired rights of individuals established by the Supreme Council and Article 5 Commission during the recent years may lead to the outcome of complaints by the owners and the annulment of approvals. Finally, the annulment of the Article 5 Commission’s approvals by the Administrative Justice Court can be summarized in the following four major factors: 1. The approvals for delegating the authorities of the Article 5 Commission; 2. The approvals contrary to the urban development principles of the Article 5 Commission; 3. The approvals contrary to the Sharia of Islam; 4. The Gratuitous possession Approvals of the Article 5 Commission of Iran’s Supreme Council for Urban Development and Architecture.

The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of organizational justice on the relationship between organizational policy and organizational citizenship behavior of sports experts in Tehran Municipality. The statistical population of the present study was all the experts of 22 districts of Tehran Municipality (N= 1800) and the statistical sample according to Cochran's formula was equal to 317 people. Finally, out of 350 distributed questionnaires, 323 questionnaires were found to be valid. A four-part questionnaire was used to collect the research data. The validity of the questionnaires was confirmed by 5 experts and Cronbach's alpha coefficient was used in the pilot study for assessing the reliability of the research tool. Conducting Pearson correlation test as well as structural equation modeling through SPSS and LISREL software were used to examine the research hypotheses. The results of Pearson test showed a negative and significant relationship between organizational policy and organizational citizenship behavior (-0.51) and regression analysis of the study showed that 32% of changes in citizenship behavior could be predicted by organizational justice and organizational policy variables (32/32). Testing the research model revealed the indirect effect (mediated by perceived organizational justice) and direct effect of perceived organizational policy on organizational citizenship behavior. Moreover, the coefficient of direct impact (-0.183) of perceived policy on organizational citizenship behavior was found to be more than its indirect effect (-0.705).