JUDGMENT : M. S. Ramachandra Rao, C.J. 1. In this Letters Patent Appeal, order dt. 10.09.2014 passed by the learned Single Judge in the writ petition is challenged. 2. It is not in dispute that there is a claim by both the appellant as well as the respondent no.5 that each of them is the first legally wedded wife of the deceased employee late Bindeshwari Singh. When the respondent no.5 had previously approached this Court in W.P(S) No. 3783 of 2012, the learned Single Judge had passed an order on 18.09.2012 asking the Accountant General (respondent no.2) to pass a suitable order after hearing both parties. Thereafter, it appears that the Accountant General asked the District Education Officer, Koderma to decide the issue. 3. We fail to understand how the Accountant General can confer jurisdiction on the District Education Officer, Koderma to decide whether the appellant or the respondent no.5 is the legally wedded wife of the deceased employee, and under what authority of law he is conferring such jurisdiction. It would have been more appropriate for the Accountant General to have directed both the parties to approach the Civil Court/Family Court to decide as to which of them is the lawfully wedded wife of the deceased employee, and only then direct payment of family pension to the successful party. Unfortunately, on the direction of the Accountant General, the District Education Officer, Koderma appears to have decided on 28.01.2014 that the respondent no.5 is the lawfully wedded wife of the deceased employee. Any such finding given by the District Education Officer, Koderma is wholly without jurisdiction and the decision rendered by him is nullity and has no validity in law. 4. The learned Single Judge in the impugned order also appears to have gone by the determination made by the District Education Officer, Koderma and held against the appellant. 5. We are not in agreement with the view expressed by the learned Single Judge and the appropriate course open to the learned Single Judge would have been to direct both the parties to approach the competent Civil Court to decide the issue as to which of them is the lawfully wedded wife of the deceased employee and then, depending on the decision therein, to make a claim before the State authorities regarding payment of family pension. 6. Accordingly, the impugned order dt. 6. Accordingly, the impugned order dt. 10.09.2014 passed in W.P(S) No. 2173 of 2013 is set-aside and both the appellant as well as the respondent no.5 are granted liberty to approach the competent Civil Court/Family Court to obtain a declaration as to their marital status qua the deceased employee, and depending on the result of the said decision of the competent Court regarding their marital status qua the deceased employee, family pension be released to the successful party. 7. This Letters Patent Appeal is accordingly, disposed of. 8. Pending I.A, if any, also stands disposed of.