Judgment This Writ Petition is filed for a Mandamus to declare the seizure of 2 packages containing Philips DVD Video Player bearing Model No.DVP3868X/94, manufactured by petitioner No.1, from the custody of petitioner No.2, as illegal and arbitrary. I have heard Mr. S. Niranjan Reddy, learned Counsel for the petitioners, and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Metrology representing the respondents. Petitioner No.1 is the manufacturer of electronic goods and Petitioner No.2 is its franchisee. On 19-05-2012, respondent No.3-District Inspector of Legal Metrology, Guntur, inspected the trading premises of petitioner No.2 and seized the abovementioned two packages. This was followed by Notice No.22/PC/2012-13, dated 16-06-2012, issued by respondent No.3 wherein it is inter alia stated that the two packages contained rubber stamp of Rs.4499/-(inclusive of all taxes) and that retail sale price was not printed on the said package. Petitioner No.1 has given a detailed reply to the said notice wherein it was pleaded that Rule 9 (1) (b) of the Legal Metrology (Packaged Commodities) Rules, 2011 (for short ‘the Rules’) made under the Legal Metrology Act, 2009 (for short ‘the Act’) included rubber stamp under the description of ‘Label’ and that therefore, the packages, which admittedly contained the rubber stamp relating to the retail price, are in conformity with the Act and the Rules. As no response was forthcoming from respondent No.3, even though substantial time had lapsed, the petitioners filed this Writ Petition. Section 2 (f) of the Act defines ‘Label’ as any written, marked, stamped, printed or graphic matter affixed to, or appearing upon any pre-packaged commodity. As no response was forthcoming from respondent No.3, even though substantial time had lapsed, the petitioners filed this Writ Petition. Section 2 (f) of the Act defines ‘Label’ as any written, marked, stamped, printed or graphic matter affixed to, or appearing upon any pre-packaged commodity. Rule 9 (1) of the Rules reads as under: “Manner in which declaration shall be made:- (1) Every declaration which is required to be made on a package under these rules shall be -- (a) legible and prominent; (b) numerals of the retail sale price and net quantity declaration shall be printed, painted or inscribed on the package in a colour that contrasts conspicuously with the background of the label; Provided that, -- (a) where any label information is blown, formed or molded on a glass or plastic surface such information need not be required to be presented in a contrasting colour; (b) where any declaration on a package is printed either in the form of hand-writing or hand-script, such declaration shall be clear, unambiguous and legible.” From the abovementioned statutory provisions, it is clear that if the price is stamped on the product, the same constitutes the ‘Label’ as prescribed under the provisions of the Act. Unfortunately, respondent No.3 has completely overlooked this crucial aspect. Respondent No.3 cannot feign ignorance of the specific statutory provisions and display his indifference to the legitimate grievance of the petitioners by supporting the indefensible act of his subordinates. The conduct of the Inspecting Officer in seizing the packages in question ignoring the specific statutory provisions and that of respondent No.3 in not objectively considering the petitioners’ representation cannot be appreciated. For the abovementioned reasons, as this Court is satisfied that the product being dealt with by petitioner No.2 conforms to the statutory provisions relating to the affixing of ‘Label’, the very seizure of the said product is liable to be declared as illegal. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is allowed with costs of Rs.10,000/-. The costs shall be first paid by respondent No.2 to the petitioners and shall be later recovered from the persons, who are responsible for the illegal and negligent act of seizure. Respondent No.3 is directed to forthwith release the seized packages to petitioner No.2. As a sequel, WPMP.No.43141 of 2012, filed by the petitioners for interim relief, is disposed of as infructuous.