IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WP/10281/2010 GOVINDRAO RAMCHANDRA POLE V/S SAKHARAM DULAJI RAUT ... Shri S.R.Bagal, Advocate for petitioner and Shri S.D.Tare, Advocate for respondent. ... CORAM : B.P. DHARMADHIKARI,J. Dated : April 15, 2011 PER COURT :- 1. Perused the impugned order. Impugned order, amongst other things, mentions that the document is without name or designation of sanctioning authority. During hearing, a photostat copy of the application is produced before me. Photostat copy bears the seal and signature of some Talathi after the cross line. The Photostat copy does not appear to be prepared from any certified copy of the mutation entry. The application filed by the present petitioner also does not indicate that the said mutation entry is a certified copy. 2. If it is a certified copy, the perspective towards it will be entirely different. Hence without observing anything more, the petitioner is permitted to file fresh application indicating the nature of document sought to be filed. The trial Court shall, thereafter, give opportunity to present respondent to file his reply and thereafter, pass fresh orders thereon as per law. 3. With this liberty, the petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. ( B.P. DHARMADHIKARI, J.) ... akl