This scholarly article aims to conduct an in-depth doctrinal analysis of the public servitude in order to define its essence, its place within the system of restrictions on property rights, and to resolve key theoretical and practical conflicts associated with its application. The primary objective of the research is to elucidate the synthetic, borderline nature of this institution, which balances between the private-law principles of a real encumbrance and the public-law mechanisms of authoritative regulation. The methodological foundation of the work comprises dogmatic (formal-legal), comparative legal, system-structural, and functional research methods. The author relies on an analysis of the norms of the Civil Code and the Land Code of the Russian Federation, relevant federal laws, as well as on the legal positions of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation and judicial practice. This approach allows for the combination of theoretical analysis with the resolution of current practical problems. The main findings of the research are as follows. The public servitude is justifiably defined as a unique, complex institution representing an authoritatively established restriction of property rights that retains the key feature of a classical servitude—the grant of a positive right to use another's property. This shapes its dual legal nature. A clear distinction is drawn between the concepts of a restriction on property rights (objective, public, established ex lege) and a private-law encumbrance (contractual, derivative), which allows for the precise determination of the systemic coordinates of the public servitude. Key systemic connections of the institution are identified and analyzed: its role as a less burdensome alternative to the seizure of a land plot, its subordination to the constitutional principle of proportionality, and the necessity of proportionate compensation for losses as a guarantee of a fair distribution of the burden of public interests. A number of significant problems are diagnosed: procedural conflict (adjudication of disputes in civil and administrative proceedings), uncertainty regarding the right-holder, the risk of competition and overlapping servitudes, imperfections in the mechanism for realizing the right to compensation for losses, as well as the potential danger of using the servitude for an unconstitutional diminution of property rights. Vectors for improving legislation and law enforcement are outlined, including the need for clear legislative formalization of establishment criteria, unification of procedures, detailing of the compensation mechanism, and overcoming the uncertainty regarding the subject of the right. The practical significance of the work lies in proposing a systemic approach to the application of norms on public servitudes, which can be used by law enforcement officials to ensure a balance of interests and by legislators for the further refinement of legal regulation. The theoretical value of the research consists in deepening the civilistic doctrine of restrictions on property rights and conceptualizing hybrid legal institutions.