JAYANT PATEL, J.

1. As in both the appeals, the common judgment of the learned Single Judge arises for consideration with the common questions involved therein, they are being considered simultaneously.

2. The present appeals are directed against the judgment and order passed by the learned Single Judge in Special Civil Application No.9722 of 1993 with Special Civil Application No.9626 of 1993 whereby the learned Single Judge has declared the action of the authority as well as that of the State Government for imposition of the scrutiny fee, development fee and levy of premium as illegal and void. Learned Single Judge has also allowed the petitioners to get back the refund of the amount of Rs.1 crore and Rs.4 lacs which was deposited pending the petitions pursuant to the interim order passed in the petitions.

3. The short facts of the appeals are that on 17.10.1985, the State Government in exercise of the powers under the Gujarat Town Planning and Urban Development Act, 1976 (hereinafter referred as the Act ) by issuing the notification constituted the Hajira Area Development Authority (hereinafter referred as the HADA for short) for securing the plan development of the area of various villages i.e. Damka, Bhatlai, Vasuva, Rajagari, Mora, Limla, Suvali and Hajira, all of Taluka Choryasi, District Surat. It appears that thereafter from the years 1986 to 1990 various parcels of lands and total about 285 hectors of lands were allotted to the original petitioners or its subsidiary company or sister concern for petrochemical complex. The original petitioners thereafter wanted to make construction over the lands which were allotted to it and, therefore, the plans were prepared and they were sent by the original petitioners to the HADA for grant of approval and necessary permission. However, on 28.3.1989, the HADA informed to the original petitioners that since the Draft Development Plan is under contemplation and was not published by the competent authority, the question of grant of permission would not arise. It is the say of the original petitioners that, thereafter, they moved to the Gram Panchayat, Mora, Taluka Choryasi for granting construction of the boundary wall which was so granted by the Sarpanch of the Gram Panchayat on 12.5.1989. On 21.8.1989, the HADA in exercise of the powers under sections 9 and 13 of the Act published the Draft Development Plan and the General Development Control Regulations containing various provisions including (1) scrutiny fee, (2) scrutiny deposit and (3) premium. On 29.9.1989, pursuant to the meeting held by the HADA on 18.9.1989 separate notification was published in exercise of the powers under section 99 of the Act whereby it was proposed to levy and impose development charges. On 1.10.1989, an advertisement was published in the newspaper inviting objections to levy and imposition of development charges as proposed by the HADA. On 16.10.1989, the HADA had issued the circular to all the industries including the original petitioning company informing that it is obligatory to obtain development permission before starting of construction without which development would be treated as illegal. On 21.12.1989, the HADA called the Chief Executive Officer of the respondent company and instructed him to stop construction work of Phase-I of their project and asked him to remain present in his office at 1.1.1990. On 4.1.1990, the HADA once again instructed the original petitioning company to stop construction activity and to remain present on 15.1.1990. On 11.1.1990, the respondent company submitted reply along with the complete list of their construction activity and the plan of Phase-I to HADA. On 15.2.1990, the HADA informed the respondent company to submit the plan in the prescribed proforma along with scrutiny fee. On 25.4.1991, the HADA submitted the proposal for development charges to the State Government for approval. On 23.8.1991, the HADA in exercise of the powers conferred under section