Presumption considers a proofing evidence in the administration cases , civil and criminal cases, nevertheless its implication does not relate directly to the incident to be proved, rather its extract by derivation . Whereas it focuses on other incident that is closely related to the incident to be proved. The second incident is considered as an alternative prove to the first incident as an original incident derivatively. The research in presumption and it is role in the administrative proof has a great importance, since it forms one of the main bases administrative judiciary to reach a fair and righteous judgment, as the access to evidences which relate directly to researching incident is rather difficult if not impossible in most cases, especially due to the nature of administrative cases which is characterized by imbalance between parties, since judge cannot always achieve facts directly, he resorts to arbitrate using rules of reasoning and common sense to recognize the greatest extent of those facts in their typical and real form. We divided this study into three chapters. In the first chapter, we explained what is the evidence in administrative court, with identifying the person who supposed to be responsible to proof, and it has been showed that it is transferring between administrative dispute parties since the balance is missing between the parties in the administrative case and this is a confirmation of the positive role of the administrative judge, In the second chapter, we identify the presumption in the administrative