Manjula Chellur, C.J.

1. These two Writ Appeals are filed against the common judgment in W.P(C).No. 29611 of 2007. The writ petitioners approached the learned Single Judge contending, their livelihood is taken away by declaring the seashore in Puthuvypu as Special Economic Zone, resulting in prohibition to enter the said area. According to the writ petitioners, they are eking out their livelihood right from 1976 onwards by mining shells from the Arabian seashore in and around Puthuvypu. After declaring the said area as a Special Economic Zone, the impending work of Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) has started for the purpose of construction of a berth. With this construction of berth for LNG, no space would be available for the petitioners to place their mined seashells on the shore which results in total deprivation of their livelihood. The action of the respondents putting up berth and plants on the shores of Arabian Sea would come in the way of livelihood of the petitioners, therefore, it is unconstitutional, unjust and is against the principles of public law, is the contention of the writ petitioners. This results in infringement of fundamental rights guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. By act of nature, Kochi Estuary had been created more than 600 years ago which resulted in accumulation of seashells on the right side of Kochi Estuary and the work of mining seashells had been carried on from time immemorial by ancestors of the writ petitioners and later on by the writ petitioners. On account of accumulation of lime shells, Cochin Port Trust was continuously giving no objection certificates to the Society of the writ petitioners for mining seashells. This bountiful gift of nature is obstructed on account of construction of berth, compound wall and oil plants at the instance of the Cochin Port Trust, Kochi Refineries Ltd. and Petronet LNG Ltd. in Puthuvypu after declaring the said area as a prohibited area being a Special Economic Zone.

2. The respondents proceeded with their work of construction of berth etc. totally ignoring the plight of the writ petitioners and their families unmindful of their action depriving their livelihood. If their only means of livelihood is taken away, it would be impossible for them to make both ends meet and they will be threatened with utter starvation, is the contention raised. With the above averments, they have sought the following reliefs:

"i) Issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to allow the petitioners to continue the present work of mining shells on the sea shore in Puthuvypu in the right side of Kochi Estuary.

ii) Issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the Respondents to pay Rs.10 lakhs to each petitioners as compensation by way of public law remedy in the event of loss of employment and livelihood in the coming days on account of the construction and installation of berth and oil tanks in and around Special Economic Zones at Puthuvypu at the instance of the respondents.

iii) Issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to rehabilitate the petitioners in any of the employments emanated on account of this construction of the installations of LNG and KRL.

iv) Such other reliefs that this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper."

3. The second respondent, Additional Secretary to Government, Industries Department, filed a counter affidavit in response to the averments indicated in the Writ Petition. After referring to the process how Cochin Port Trust allotted land to the Petronet LNG Ltd. in Re-Survey No.347 at Puthuvype area, she contends that the approach road to the project site has to be constructed by the Cochin Port Trust. She further contends that as the project involves conversion of Liquefied Natural Gas to Re- gasified Liquefied Natural Gas to be sold to various companies, who, in turn, transport the said product through GAIL pipeline to various customers like power producers, fertilizer manufacturers and other industrial units, the ar