In a relief to rebel Shiv Sena lawmakers, the Supreme Court Monday kept in abeyance the disqualification proceedings before the Deputy Speaker of the Maharashtra Assembly till July 11 and sought responses to pleas by rebel MLAs questioning the legality of notices seeking their disqualification.

The top court, however, refused to pass any interim order on the plea of the Maharashtra government that there should not be any floor test in the Assembly and said they can always approach it in case of illegality.

A vacation bench of Justices Surya Kant and J B Pardiwala directed the Maharashtra government to protect the life, liberty, and property of 39 rebel Shiv Sena MLAs and their family members.

While issuing notice to the Maharashtra deputy speaker, the top court directed him to put on affidavit records of the no-trust notice served upon him by rebel MLAs.

The top court also recorded the statement of Maharashtra's counsel that adequate steps have been taken to protect the life and property of rebel MLAs.

The matter will now be heard on July 11

The Supreme Court Monday also issued a notice to Maharashtra deputy Speaker on the pleas of rebel Shiv Sena MLAs, led by minister Eknath Shinde, against the disqualification notice issued by him. But the apex court asked the rebel MLAs why they did not move the Bombay High Court first.

The vacation bench was told by senior advocate N K Kaul, who appeared for the rebel MLAs, that the Uddhav Thackeray group is in the minority of the legislative party and has been subverting the state machinery .

Kaul said that the atmosphere is not conducive for these MLAs in Bombay as they have been threatened.

He cited the apex court verdict in the Nabam Rebia case of Arunachal Pradesh and said the deputy speaker is not competent to proceed with the disqualification of MLAs when a plea for his own removal is pending.Kaul said 39 MLAs are together against the minority group.

Responding to the rebels' argument that Deputy Speaker Narahari Zirwal cannot decide on MLAs' disqualification notices when a no-trust vote is pending against him, his counsel Rajeev Dhawan said the no- trust motion was rejected as it was sent via an unverified email address.

To this, Justice Surya Kant asked, "If Deputy Speaker is saying that he is rejecting the motion that seeks his removal, the question is can the Deputy Speaker be the Judge of his own court?"