The present study aims to examine the position of public rights supervision in the Iranian administrative justice system, examines the capacities and challenges existing in the structure of the Public Rights Deputy in the Administrative Justice Court and attempts to present a conceptual and institutional framework to enhance the role of this institution in protecting public interests. The main issue of the research is that the traditional structure of administrative proceedings, with its emphasis solely on personal beneficiaries and individual-centered models, is unable to respond to lawsuits without a specific plaintiff in areas such as the environment, public health, and intergenerational rights. The research hypothesis is based on the assumption that effective public rights supervision requires a transition from a complaint-centered logic to a structured and problem-centered litigation, with an emphasis on institutional competence, public representation, and civil participation. This study uses a descriptive-analytical method and a comparative approach, through the analysis of laws, legal documents, and experiences of comparative systems, to explain new concepts such as "structured people's rights," "public grievance," and "institutional moral competence." The findings show that institutionalizing litigation by disinterested institutional actors, along with designing an independent and flexible judicial process, can address the gaps in the protection of public rights. The importance of these results lies in the fact that they pave the way for the conceptual and institutional transformation of Iran's public law from a static system to a participatory, forward-looking, and justice-oriented model, and provide new capacities for public governance and institutional accountability.