Mr. A. Srivastava is the Deputy Commissioner of a district through which a major river flows, effectively cutting the district into two halves. The entire district has no bridge to connect the two halves and people who travel from one part of the district to another have to avail of the services of boatmen- whose ancestors have been playing this trade for centuries. Rows of eateries have also come up on both sides of the river- and they do brisk business. Mr. Srivastava is seriously considering sanctioning the building of a bridge to connect the two parts. This, he is sure, would facilitate trade and business and enhance economic activity in his district. However, his subordinates point out that the boatmen would lose their livelihoods and so also would the owners of the eateries on both sides of the river. Further, as per rules, Mr. Srivastava cannot offer compensation to those affected.

Which of the following decisions is/are most appropriate?

1.    Since some people would be adversely affected by the building of a bridge, Mr Srivastava should not sanction the building of a bridge.

2.    Mr Srivastava should sanction the building of a bridge only after he is in a position to offer alternative livelihoods to the boatmen.