<p>The high court on Tuesday dismissed a PIL seeking directions to the authorities to implement a ‘moving garden’ scheme turning the rooftops of cars into a garden.</p>.<p>The petitioner claims to have a garden on his car’s rooftop since 2015.</p>.<p>The counsel for the petitioner said while many appreciated his concern for the environment, none emulated the idea.</p>.<p>The petitioner, therefore, requested the court to direct the authorities to hold a survey and design a plan for a ‘moving garden’ scheme.</p>.<p>The petitioner claimed that the scheme would increase oxygen, arrest pollution, and help the environment.</p>.<p>The petitioner claimed to have forwarded representations to various agencies, including to the Prime Minister’s Office (PMO).</p>.<p>A division bench headed by Chief Justice Prasanna B Varale refused to entertain the petition observing that an individual has the right not to use the vehicle for any purpose other than transportation.</p>.<p>“Though the attempt made by the petitioner in his individual way is appreciable and though the submission looks very attractive at the first blush, one can’t lose sight of the fact that using the vehicle in the way the user likes is the choice of an individual; the owner of the vehicle.</p>.<p>"By issuing such directions to the state government, conducting a survey and implementation of a scheme and effecting a scheme there is certainly an encroachment and infringement of an individual’s choice,” the bench said.</p>.<p>The bench also said besides infringement of an individual right, asking a person to install a moving garden compulsorily would also mean modification to the vehicle, which may not be in consonance with the Motor Vehicles Act or rules.</p>
<p>The high court on Tuesday dismissed a PIL seeking directions to the authorities to implement a ‘moving garden’ scheme turning the rooftops of cars into a garden.</p>.<p>The petitioner claims to have a garden on his car’s rooftop since 2015.</p>.<p>The counsel for the petitioner said while many appreciated his concern for the environment, none emulated the idea.</p>.<p>The petitioner, therefore, requested the court to direct the authorities to hold a survey and design a plan for a ‘moving garden’ scheme.</p>.<p>The petitioner claimed that the scheme would increase oxygen, arrest pollution, and help the environment.</p>.<p>The petitioner claimed to have forwarded representations to various agencies, including to the Prime Minister’s Office (PMO).</p>.<p>A division bench headed by Chief Justice Prasanna B Varale refused to entertain the petition observing that an individual has the right not to use the vehicle for any purpose other than transportation.</p>.<p>“Though the attempt made by the petitioner in his individual way is appreciable and though the submission looks very attractive at the first blush, one can’t lose sight of the fact that using the vehicle in the way the user likes is the choice of an individual; the owner of the vehicle.</p>.<p>"By issuing such directions to the state government, conducting a survey and implementation of a scheme and effecting a scheme there is certainly an encroachment and infringement of an individual’s choice,” the bench said.</p>.<p>The bench also said besides infringement of an individual right, asking a person to install a moving garden compulsorily would also mean modification to the vehicle, which may not be in consonance with the Motor Vehicles Act or rules.</p>