Context: In an unprecedented order, the Department of Personnel and Training (DoPT) invoked Rule 6(I) of the Indian Administrative Service (cadre) Rules, 1954 to place the services of West Bengal Chief Secretary Alapan Bandyopadhyay with the Government of India. What is it? Rule 6(1) of the Indian Administrative Service (cadre) rules, 1954 states: A cadre officer may, with the concurrence of the state governments concerned and the central government, be deputed for service under the central government or another state government or under a company, association or body of individuals, whether incorporated or not, which is wholly or substantially owned or controlled by the central government or by another state government. What happens in case of disagreement? Rule 6(I) states that “provided that in case of any disagreement, the matter shall be decided by the Central Government and the State Government shall give effect to the decision of the Central Government.” What’s the Concern/issue now? It is being called a “blatant misuse of power and an attempt to encroach on state’s jurisdiction.” What has the Supreme Court said in such matters? Earlier in December 2020, the Home Ministry had attached three Indian Police Service (IPS) officers of West Bengal cadre but the State government did not relieve them. 1. Following this, a petition was filed which stressed that the unique dichotomy in the prevalent laws is itself self-contradictory and violative of Article 14. 2. It claimed that this rule has created havoc in the law-and-order situation and in the administrative structure of the concerned state governments. However, the court rejected the petition. Sources: the Hindu.