ISLAMABAD - The counsel for NAB Chairman Justice (Retd) Deedar Hussain Shah on Thursday urged the Supreme Court to let the Sindh High Court first decide the fate of his client as a similar nature of petition had been pending with the SHC as well. A four-member bench of the apex court headed by Justice Javed Iqbal and comprising Justice Tassaduq Hussain Jillani, Justice Raja Fayyaz Ahmed and Justice Asif Saeed Khosa heard different petitions against the appointment of incumbent Chairman NAB Justice (Retd) Deedar Hussain Shah. Khalid Ranjha, counsel for Justice (Retd) Deedar Hussain Shah, stated, "The NAB chairman requested the court that as similar nature of petition is pending with the Sindh High Court therefore let first it decide the matter and then Supreme Court hear the appeal against it." He said Justice (Retd) Deedar was appointed as chairman NAB by President Asif Ali Zardari in accordance with law, therefore he could only be removed under Article 209 of the Constitution. Justice Khosa said if the appointment was illegal then the court had the right to review it as it did in the case of Prosecutor General NAB Danishwar Malik. Ranjha replied that law ministry removed Danishwar after fulfilling the requirements under Article 209. Justice Khosa said if that was the case then the court also had to see under what law the acting PG was functioning. He said in view of the political prosecutions, consultation with the Leader of the Opposition in the National Assembly was introduced in the past system of the appointment of NAB chairman so that the NAB chief could enjoy the confidence across the board. Justice Jillani said that main issue before the court was not the personality of Justice (Retd) Deedar but they had to examine the legal issue. Khalid Ranjha said consistent efforts were made by the Leader of the House to consult the Opposition Leader for the appointment of NAB chairman but he constantly objected. Justice Jillani questioned if any advice was given by the PM to the President in this regard. Justice Khosa asked the learned counsel to clarify, as according to media reports the prime minister said no advice was given. Ranjha replied that there was difference between the utterance of a political person and a judge. He prayed to the apex court "to wait till the SHC pass judgement on his client's appointment." Abdul Hafeez Pirzada, counsel for Federation of Pakistan, said that earlier Section 6 of NAB Ordinance 1999 had legal backing but in nature it was political. He said that consultation did not give dictatorial role or veto power to the opposition leader to stop everything. He said the Article 186A was gone through so many changes. Earlier the Supreme Court could have lifted the case from any High Court itself but after the 18th Amendment it had been dropped. Justice Khosa remarked that the power of SC could not be hijacked if a matter was before the apex court and somebody filed the petition of same nature in the high court. He said that in certain cases the power of the apex court was supreme. Pirzada said the Indian Supreme Court in Bhagawatti case had decided the jurisdiction of the high court and the supreme court. Akram Sheikh, counsel for Opposition Leader in National Assembly Chaudhry Nisar, said that the whole case was of process of compliance but there had been deliberate defiance of Article 48 of the Constitution. Article 48 says: "In the exercise of his functions, the President shall act [on and] in accordance with the advice of the Cabinet [or the Prime Minister]." Justice Javed Iqbal said that there should be a system so that the Supreme Court has not to interfere again and again. The case was adjourned till Tuesday (February 8).