The mechanism for resolving disputes among government institutions, as one of the important and noteworthy matters within the country’s administrative system, is sometimes pursued through arbitral dispute resolution and, at other times, through the application of mechanisms at both the macro and lower levels. One of the mechanisms falling within the latter category, and the subject of this article, consists of the resolutions of the Board of Ministers referred to in Article 134 of the Constitution, concerning the resolution of disputes among government institutions. In certain cases, such resolutions may result in the infringement of the rights of public-law and private-law legal persons. Adopting a descriptive-analytical method and relying on documentary and library-based sources, this article seeks to answer the question of how, and subject to which legal standards, the Administrative Justice Court has jurisdiction to review the resolutions of the Board of Ministers issued pursuant to Article 134 of the Constitution for the purpose of resolving disputes among government institutions. Following an examination of the principal mechanisms for resolving disputes among the government branches and the government institutions in the Islamic Republic of Iran at both the constitutional and administrative levels, this study concludes that, by virtue of the Constitution, the unrestricted scope of the Administrative Justice Court Act, and legal principles - including the principle of subjecting the administration to judicial review in order to ensure the accountability of the institutions, as well as the unrestricted nature of the right to seek judicial redress and judicial adjudication - the Administrative Justice Court has jurisdiction to hear complaints against the decisions and resolutions of the aforementioned Board.