ISLAMABAD - The Supreme Court Thursday returned the petition challenging decision of the parliamentary committee for judges for not approving the confirmation of two additional judges of the Sindh High Court recommended by the judicial commission of Pakistan. A four-member special bench of the apex court comprising Justice Mahmood Akhtar Shahid Siddiqui, Justice Jawad S Khawaja, Justice Khilji Arif Hussain and Justice Tariq Pervez heard the petition filed by the Sindh High Court Bar Association, Sukkhar. The court returned the petition and ruled the matter was related to concurrent jurisdiction, hence it should be presented before the Sindh High Court. The Sindh High Court Bar Association, Sukkhar, had challenged the decision of the parliamentary committee for not approving the confirmation of two additional judges of the Sindh High Court recommended by the judicial commission of Pakistan on August 27. Appearing on notice, Farukh Naseem, counsel for the bar association submitted before the court that the matter was very important as it pertains to access to justice. He gave various examples wherein the apex court entertained petitions filed under Article 199 including the one which was filed against the dissolution of government of former prime minister Nawaz Sharif. Farukh Nasim gave the reference of a Supreme Court judgment in 2010 wherein Chief Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry held that the justiciability of the parliamentary committee was with the Supreme Court. Justice Tariq Pervez remarked it was an interim order passed by the apex court before the 18th Amendment. Justice Jawad S Khawaja observed that in the previous cases, they had dealt with an important aspect because Article 175-A was never part of the constitution and it was not interpreted. He further said they had also written about Article 199 in that decision. You should consider going to the high court and you could agitate your issue there because it was a matter of concurrent jurisdiction, Justice Khawaja said. He said the high court too has the jurisdiction under Article 184(3) to hear as the Supreme Court. Farukh Naseem, however, submitted it might take few days while the tenure of the two additional judges was being expired on September 24, hence he requested the court to decide the matter. The court, however, ruled it could return the petition and ask the high court to take it up immediately to which the learned counsel agreed. Meanwhile, the court returned the petition and directed the counsel to present it before the Sindh High Court. It is pertinent to mention here that on September 9, 2001, the parliamentary committee on judges had rejected the confirmation of services of two additional judges of the Sindh High Court (SHC) including Justice Justice Ghulam Sarwar Korai and Justice Irfan Saadat Khan. The judicial commission of Pakistan, headed by Chief Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry on August 27, 2011, had recommended to the parliamentary committee confirmation of six additional judges of the SHC. The parliamentary committee, however, approved the conformation of four additional judges of the Sindh High Court (SHC) including Justice Shahid Anwar Bajwa, Justice Ahmed Ali Sheikh, Justice Aqeel Abbasi and Justice Muneeb Akhtar but rejected the confirmation of other two judges of the Sindh High Court including Justice Ghulam Sarwar Korai and Justice Irfan Saadat Khan. Later, the Sindh High Court, Sukkhar, filed a petition in the Supreme Court challenging the rejection of two additional judges of the Sindh High Court by the parliamentary committee.