East Hampton officials doctored government documents in the legal saga to privatize the town’s airport, according to a new court filing — but Hamptons bureaucrats say it was just a mistake.

The stunning claim was made by lawyers at Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman, who are representing a limited liability company that’s suing the ritzy town over its plans to close the public-use East Hampton Airport, only to reopen it under private, town-controlled ownership.

In the June 30 filing, lawyers for Pillsbury allege that the town submitted to the court two Federal Aviation Administration documents, one dated March 18 and another March 22, but erased the final paragraphs that would have caught them in a lie.

Pillsbury, representing East End Hangars LLC, got their hands on the original documents the FAA sent to the town through Freedom of Information Act requests. The original letters have additional lines and a signature that do not appear in the exhibits the town’s counsel submitted to the judge, court filings show.

“Both documents were clearly edited to remove text,” Pillsbury lawyers wrote in the Suffolk County Supreme Court filing reviewed by The Post. “All contact information for FAA personnel in both documents was removed, including that of Diogenes Ramos … who signed both notices.”

Importantly, one of the documents was missing the line that said, “You will need to acknowledge and return an email indicating you want to proceed with the De-Activation…” 

The town has previously said in court documents that it would “not be undertaking deactivation or closure of the East Hampton Airport” — which the missing line seemed to contradict. It has told residents repeatedly it would not be closing, or deactivating, the airport, despite critics thinking it secretly plans to.

The tony enclave has been locked in an acrimonious legal battle over its airport plans after the town board voted in January to close down the tarmac and reopen it days later to only privately owned aircraft.

The Town of East Hampton told The Post in a statement that an employee meant to redact the personal contact information from FAA staff members who signed the documents and “inadvertently blanked out the full line rather than just the contact information.”

“It is unfortunate that the litigants have chosen to attack our lawyers in court this way without reaching out to them first to confirm they didn’t ‘doctor’ anything,” a rep for East Hampton said. 

But not everyone is buying that explanation. Metal mogul and East End resident Andy Sabin, who is suing the town over its airport plan as part of a different case, accused the town of lying. 

“They altered documents and removed wording,” Sabin said.

The businessman said he recently ran into town supervisor Peter Van Scoyoc at a lobster bake, where he confronted him over the allegations.

“I said to him, ‘Peter, you need to go to prison.’ And he says to me, ‘I need a vacation,’” Sabin said.

If it’s proven that the doctoring was intentional, there could be serious legal implications for the town leaders and their counsel, Cooley LLP, which declined to comment to The Post.

The town is submitting documents under the penalty of perjury, Dmitriy Shakhnevich, an adjunct assistant professor at John Jay College of Criminal Justice, told The Post.

“The real issue is whether it was intentional or negligent,” he said.

If it was intentional, the judge could get prosecutors involved, Shakhnevich added, and could certainly impose court sanctions on the town.

Submitting doctored documents to a court is a felony in New York and since the documents belonged to the FAA, a federal agency, it could also be considered a felony forgery.

The FAA did not return multiple requests for comment.