The administrative justice system, as one of the most important instruments for achieving justice and the rule of law, plays a fundamental role in protecting citizens' rights against the decisions and actions of administrative bodies. In the Iranian legal system, the structure of administrative adjudication is based on a dual system in which the resolution of administrative disputes is distributed between judicial and quasi-judicial authorities. Although this structure was established with the aim of promoting specialization and enhancing efficiency, in practice it has encountered numerous challenges that limit the effective functioning of administrative justice. Using an analytical and descriptive approach, the present study examines the fundamental challenges of Iran’s administrative justice system with a particular focus on its dual structure. In this regard, the most significant issues analyzed include conflicts and overlaps in jurisdiction, the multiplicity of adjudicative bodies, inconsistencies in procedures and decision-making, delays in adjudication, and weaknesses in supervision and enforcement mechanisms. The findings of the study indicate that these challenges do not operate independently; rather, they are structurally interconnected and collectively contribute to weakening legal certainty, reducing the predictability of decisions, and limiting citizens’ effective access to administrative justice. The results further suggest that existing inefficiencies stem less from a lack of legal regulations and more from structural incoherence, institutional fragmentation, and deficiencies in supervisory and enforcement mechanisms. Accordingly, reconsidering the structure of administrative adjudication, clarifying jurisdictions, strengthening consistency in judicial practice, and ensuring effective oversight and enforcement mechanisms are essential requirements for improving administrative justice and enhancing public confidence in the administrative justice system.