Grievance Redress Mechanisms (GRMs) have emerged as critical instruments for strengthening accountability, transparency, and citizen trust in public administration. This article critically examines the conceptual foundations, institutional frameworks, and empirical evidence on the effectiveness of GRMs in Sri Lanka's local public sector. It synthesizes the global and regional scholarship on GRMs with a policy analysis of national frameworks, drawing on international best practices (World Bank, UNDP) and national guidelines. The study highlights both the promise and the limitations of current mechanisms. Findings reveal that while GRM's provisions have been institutionalized through citizen charters, ombudsperson offices, and project-based grievance systems, implementation remains uneven. Persistent deficits in accessibility, timeliness, documentation, and data-driven learning due to political interference, resource constraints, and limited citizen awareness. Comparative insights suggest that Sri Lanka's GRM landscape lags behind global participatory governance models, particularly in monitoring, evaluation, and feedback integration. The analysis emphasizes the need for institutional strengthening, digital innovations, participatory oversight mechanisms, and the adoption of Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) to ensure accountability and responsiveness. By bridging literature and policy analysis, this study contributes to ongoing debates on governance reform and offers actionable pathways for enhancing GRM's effectiveness in Sri Lanka's public sector.