“…However, these methods have their own disadvantages of high cost, generation of secondary pollutants, less adaptability toward water from a variety of sources, and sensitivity toward pH change, which make them restricted to some of the metal ions. Adsorption is a well-developed process and has an edge over these methods due to its simplicity, cost-effectiveness, and applicability to all types of metal ions. − There is a large amount of published research literature, where a variety of bioadsorbents (rice husk, chitosan/bentonite composites, , chitosan beads, alginate beads, groundnut shell, biomass gasifier waste materials, tea leaf biomass, and biochar), organic sorbents (α-FeOOH, iminodiacetic acid cation-exchange resin, resorcinol–formaldehyde beads, imidazole-functionalized adsorbents), organic polymers and composites (porous organic polymers, polyaniline-doped sulfuric acid, polypyrrole/monodisperse latex spheres, cellulose@PEI aerogel, NFe 3 O 4 starch-Glu-NFe 3 O 4 ED, and silica-based inorganic–organic hybrid materials), metal–organic frameworks (Cu(I)-MOF@Fe 3 O 4 , ZIF-67 MOF@-aminated chitosan beads), metal oxides (Fe/Mn binary oxides, Fe 3 O 4 nanoparticles hybridized with carbonaceous materials, ferric hydroxide/oxohydroxides), and core@shell particles (polypyrrole attapulgite core–shells, Fe@Fe 2 O 3 core–shell nanowires) have been employed for the adsorptive removal of Cr(VI) and various other heavy metal ions . To the best of our knowledge, intermetallic compounds are still untouched in this field despite their superior properties, such as high thermal and structural stability, hardness, corrosion, chemical resistance, etc.…”