Senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi mentioned the matter before a bench headed by Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi and sought urgent hearing. The court assured that their plea would be heard but not on Wednesday.
The court is most likely to hear the matter on Thursday.
The petition filed by MLAs claim that the actions of the Speaker "are vitiated by mala fide as evident in his actions".
According to simple arithmetic, the strength of the House being 224, the government headed by H.D. Kumaraswamy has lost its majority (112 seats) seats as the resignations have brought down its strength to 103 seats.
"Notwithstanding the same and fearing that the Chief Minister may have to tender resignation for want of confidence of the House, the Speaker is acting in a partisan manner to frustrate the will of the House," the petitioners contended.
The 10 MLAs in the petition have made two specific prayers before the court -- direct the Speaker to accept the resignations and restrain the Speaker from proceeding with application on disqualification of the MLAs.
The petitioners have also requested the court to pass an order which it may deem fit in connection with the facts and circumstances of the present case.
They contended that the Chief Minister, despite being reduced to minority, was refusing to seek a vote of confidence.
"And as a result of the concerted acts between the Speaker and the government, a minority government which does not enjoy the confidence of the House continues in power illegally," said the petition.
Referring to the current political situation as extraordinary, the petitioners sought "the court to invoke its extraordinary jurisdiction for upholding the democratic principles as enshrined in the Constitution".
The petitioners pleaded that there should be no fraud on the Constitution.
Attacking the deliberate delay caused by the Speaker, they said his actions were not in compliance with Constitutional democracy.
"Any elected Member of the Legislature is entitled, in consultation with his conscience or other attendant circumstances, to resign his membership of the Legislature. It is stated that the MLAs disenchanted with the mal-administration under the present dispensation wish to resign," said the petitioner.
Equating the resignation as their fundamental right, the MLAs said these were in public interest. But the Speaker was acting in an arbitrary and illegal manner.
The top court also said the Speaker is free to decide on the resignation of the MLAs as per the Constitution.
According to the order, MLAs are free to skip the trust vote in the Karnataka Assembly slated for tomorrow.
The court was hearing petitions filed by 15 rebel MLAs, seeking directions to the Assembly Speaker to accept their resignations.
"The Speaker should decide freely, as the court will not come in the way of this process....", said the court, citing the trust-vote which is scheduled on July 18 in the House.
The rebel MLAs are free to not participate in the trust-vote, said the bench, headed by Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi. It said the decision of the Speaker should be placed before the court.
The court said it was passing interim orders in facts and circumstances of the case and to maintain "constitutional balance" and "competing rights" of the parties."
The court also said the Speaker should be allowed to pass appropriate orders on the resignation of the MLAs within parameters of Article 190 of the Constitution and relevant the Rules.
During the day-long arguments on Tuesday, the parties involved pointed out to the bench the implications of the ongoing political crisis in Karnataka on the state as well as elsewhere, and also questioned the apex court's jurisdiction power to entertain the rebel MLAs' petition.
Hearing rebel MLAs counsel senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi, the bench said: "We cannot say, in which way, the Speaker should decide the resignation or disqualification of MLAs. We cannot fetter him. Although, the important question is, is there any constitutional obligation for the Speaker to decide upon the resignations before the disqualification of the MLA or to club his decisions on both?"
The bench asked counsel Abhishek Manu Singhvi what stopped Speaker K.R. Ramesh Kumar from deciding on whether to accept or reject the resignations tendered by the MLAs on July 6.
"You were silent on the resignations till the MLAs came to the Supreme Court. Why? If you have decided on the resignations, then where is the scope for disqualification?" the Chief Justice asked Singvhi.
Singhvi replied that the Speaker had filed an affidavit in the apex court explaining what had happened.
Asked why wasn't a decision taken when the MLAs went to the Speaker with their resignations, Singhvi said it was a written communication, and the Speaker was not available on that day. "But the decision was communicated to him on July 6," the court added.
Singhvi argued that the first condition of a genuine resignation tendered by an MLA was that "he has to be personally present before the Speaker" and added that the MLAs first met the Speaker on July 11.
Reacting sharply to the argument, the court said that the provision did not negate resigning by letter, but if the MLAs did make a personal visit to the Speaker then he was expected to decide on their resignations immediately. "Why didn't it happen on July 11?" the bench further queried.
Asking if the Speaker was challenging the Supreme Court's jurisdiction power, the Chief Justice said: "For your benefit, the court had ordered a floor test (referring to the last year's floor test) and appointed a Protem Speaker in a midnight hearing. The exercise of jurisdiction of our power depends only on self-restraint."
Singhvi said the Speaker was in no way questioning the court's jurisdiction and added: "Suppose a Speaker goes crazy, then Your Lordships can intervene."
The Chief Justice also heard senior advocate Rajeev Dhavan, who was representing Karnataka Chief Minister H.D. Kumaraswamy, and questioned the veracity of the petition filed by the rebel MLAs.
Asking the Supreme Court to have looked at the notice behind the petition, Dhawan said: "The court should have not entertained this petition," he said.
A BJP leader said the rebels, who have been staying at
a luxury hotel since early this month are "very happy" after the Janata Dal (Secular)-Congress coalition government led by Chief Minister H D Kumaraswamy lost the trust vote.
"They (rebel MLAs) got what they wanted," the leader said, referring to the Kumaraswamy-led government losing the trust vote in the Karnataka Assembly on Tuesday evening.
The MLAs will leave Mumbai after Yeddyurappa is sworn in as CM, he said.
The rebels had earlier denied any BJP role in their resignations and withdrawal of support to the government.
Ahead of the crucial floor test that decided the fate of the Kumaraswamy-led government, Yeddyurappa had alleged the ruling coalition was unnecessarily buying time despite knowing that whip issued to the ruling coalition MLAs was of no use.
The 14 MLAs had failed to attend the House on July 23, when former chief minister H.D. Kumaraswamy moved the confidence motion and lost by 6 votes.
New Chief Minister B.S. Yediyurappa has to prove his majority in the state Assembly on Monday.
"At the cabinet meeting held soon after I took oath as Chief Minister, I decided to go for floor test in the Assembly on Monday at 10 a.m., to prove majority," Yediyurappa has told a press conference on Thursday.
"I am resigning from this august post as Speaker of the state legislative Assembly for personal reasons. I thank all the members for cooperating with me during my 14-month long tenure in this chair," Kumar told the legislators in Kannada and left the House.
Before resigning, the 70-year-old veteran Congress lawmaker from Kolar assembly segment, about 100 km east of Bengaluru, presided over the proceedings that included the BJP's Chief Minister B.S. Yediyurappa moving and winning the confidence motion by voice vote, approving the finance bill for the state budget for fiscal 2019-20 and its appropriation estimates.
"As I have to rush to Hyderabad to attend the last rites of Congress veteran Jaipal Reddy, who passed away on Sunday, I seek the permission of all the members to leave the House, handing over the chair to Deputy Speaker Krishna Reddy of the Janata Dal-Secular (JD-S).
Though Kumar has been in the spotlight throughout this month for his conduct inside and outside the Assembly during the political crisis that gripped the southern state, his decision to disqualify 17 rebel legislators of the Congress and the JD-S on July 25 and July 28 made him controversial. The rebels and the BJP criticised him, terming his decision one-sided, bad in law and against the spirit of the Constitution, especially the provisions of the 10th schedule or the anti-defection law.
Earlier, two rebel Congress leaders -- Ramesh L Jharkhiholi and Mahesh Kumathalli -- and an independent leader R Shanker, who were disqualified on July 25, had moved the apex court on July 29.
Disqualified JD (S) MLAs -- A H Vishwanath, K Gopalaiah, Narayana Gowda -- have filed a joint petition challenging the July 28 decision of disqualification by K R Ramesh Kumar, who resigned on Monday as Speaker of the House.
The Congress MLAs who have approached the apex court are -- Prathap Gouda Patil, B C Patil, Shivaram Hebbar, S T Somashekar, Byrathi Basavaraj, Munirathna.
Others who were disqualified are -- Roshan Baig, Anand Singh, MTB Nagaraj, Dr Sudhakar, Sand Shrimant Patil (all Congress).