JUDGMENT Santosh Yadav, since deceased, was married to the third respondent, Kusum Devi. The second and third petitioners are minor children of the age of seven and four years respectively, born from the marriage. Santosh Yadav died an unnatural death on 19 May 2015, following which Case Crime No 737 of 2015 has been registered under Sections 147, 148 and 302 of the Penal Code at Police Station Kotwali, District Ghazipur. The first petitioner Sunil Yadav is the brother of the deceased. The petition contains an averment that the deceased had short term deposits in the Bank of Maharashtra at its Ghazipur Branch as well as in the Union Bank of India. The petitioners have sought a direction to the two banks not to release any amount in favour of the third respondent out of the amounts invested by the deceased account holder. 2. During the course of the hearing, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Bank of Maharashtra, the first respondent, states that in respect of one of the two accounts held with the Bank, there is no nomination whereas in respect of the other, the nomination is in favour of Smt Rekha Devi, mother of the deceased. As regards the Union Bank of India, it has been stated that the nomination is in favour of the third respondent, Kusum Devi. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respective Banks state that the banks are required to act in accordance with the nomination wherever it exists and where there is no nomination, parties would have to establish their claims by following due process of law before the competent court. 3. In this view of the matter, it would neither be appropriate nor proper for this Court to entertain writ proceedings. Such a claim which is sought to be asserted on behalf of the minor children by the first petitioner, may be addressed before the court of competent jurisdiction for being resolved in accordance with law. The petition is accordingly disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.