S.C. Pandey, J.

1. Counsel for the applicant/ petitioner is heard on the question of admission.

2. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that there is omission in the impugned order dated 9.7.1998, passed in Civil Revision No. 83 of 1998 because it was not put to the court that the Licensing Authority, Alwar is also sought to be examined for proving that no such licence was issued by it as was sought to be proved by the driver of the vehicle. The learned Counsel for the applicant/petitioner does not dispute the fact that the licensing authority itself has issued a certificate to the effect that no such licence, as filed in the case by the driver of the vehicle, exists in the record of the Licensing Authority, Alwar. Such a certificate is admissible in evidence as a public document under Section 74(1)(iii) of the Evidence Act. The certificate is the record of the act done by the public officer, who has found, after examining itself its own record, that the licence does not exist. This can be proved by producing the original certificate in the court.

3. The second grievance of applicant/ petitioner is that the trial court has held that the photocopy of the driving licence co