JUDGMENT

KRISHNA IYER, J.:—This big bunch of writ petitions shows how litigation has a habit of proliferation in our processual sytem since cases are considered in isolation, not in their comprehensive implications and docket management is an art awaiting its Indian dawn. The facts, being admitted, obviate debate. All these appellants and writ petitioners had paid market fees at the increased rate of 3 per cent (raised from the original 2 per cent) under Haryana Act No. 22 of 1977. Man dealers challenged the levies as unconstitutional, and this Court, ina series of appeals, C. A. No. 1083 of 1977 etc., Kewal Krishna v. State of Punjab, decided on May 4, 1979: (reported in AIR 1980 SC 1008 ruled that the excess of 1% over the original rte of 2% was ultra vires. This cast a consequential liability on the market committees to refund the illegal portion. They were not so ordered probably because they could not so ordered probably because they could not straightway be quantified. The petitioners who has, under mistake, paid larger sums which, after the decision of this Court holding the levy illegal, have become refundable, demand a direction to that effect to the market committees conc