We want LI to be one of the friendliest places on the internet, where lawyers and law students help each other with their career related queries and occasionally discuss other stuff that might affect their lives too. In other words:
1. Be kind, respectful and helpful to each other.
2. Be bona fide, truthful, genuine and curious.
3. Assume the best intention of others.
Therefore, in using the site, you must agree to do your best to uphold these community guidelines.
Note that what you find here is written and moderated by anonymous people on the internet.
Therefore everything you read here is very likely unverified, rumour, speculation and/or downright false.
In continuing to read anything here, you must therefore agree not to take anything you read here as factual and that you will exercise due caution, diligence and common sense before acting on any information you may come across here.
You also agree to report any inaccurate or malicious comments with the buttons. Moderators take action within 24 hours, as required and appropriate under law.
Our full terms and conditions apply too.
Do you solemnly agree to all of the above?
The core dispute: after tendering notice, the firm unilaterally curtailed the contractual 30-day notice period by cutting the last working day short — conveniently avoiding the obligation to pay fee in lieu of notice. The timing is hard to miss: the truncation neatly sidestepped a bonus payment that would have triggered at month-end under the retainership terms.
The notice goes further — raising claims for a promised increment with arrears effective November 2025, which the firm strung along with vague, non-committal responses for months. When pushed, the partners apparently told the associate to “remind them in March” — and then quietly ensured there was no March to remind them in.
The firm’s reply cited performance concerns — without a single particular to back them up. Convenient, given that during the entire period the associate was being billed out to clients and appreciated internally.
The notice also flags professional misconduct by the partners and an inappropriate work environment — details the associate says they’re happy to share with moderators directly.
Room inventory list
The following table indicates the number of rooms of each category available for Men and Women residents
Inventory
2 Bed
3 bed (cubicle)
3 bed (Non bunk)
3 bed (Bunk)
Total Beds
Men’s Residences
75
66
39
18
519
Women’s Residences
40
21
5
93
437
Budget cuts?
Mass layoffs?
Recruitment freeze?
How bad will it be?
Of course, nepo kids will remain unscathed but my question is about regular people.
https://www.ndtvprofit.com/markets/uday-kotak-says-prepare-for-the-worst-urges-india-to-brace-for-big-shock-from-us-iran-conflict-11482577
Anyone here who spent years in BigLaw and then went independent? How did it go? Are you still independent? Do you regret it? What was more rewarding for you? How did you manage to build clients?
Ok maybe it wasn’t a quick question rather few but you get the drift. Your kind comments will help few souls.
Personally, I've found the JNLUD to be interesting. I read it regularly though not fully. There's indconlawphil, but that's not really it.
Still good enough to read The Caravan, India Today, Economic Times & Times of India etc.
1) PAY - It is definitely less than the average corporate pay. In fact, your peers in corp will always earn more, even if you are breaking into Tier 1 [at least I believe so; I could have negotiated my own deal poorly lol]. At 4 PQE, a lot of my friends have been struggling to crack 1L a month (in hand), while corp/lit people seem to be getting it quicker.
2) OVER-SPECIALIZATION - So Boutiques largely run the game in terms of prosecution (at least in Delhi), and also (owing to the SME business they take up as opposed to big ticket clients that a Tier 1 looks for) do see a lot of highly tricky cases. But they also overly-compartmentalize. In fact, prosecution itself is broken down into: contention and non-contentious. I have spent time at firms where I literally just did oppositions or prosecutions or C&Ds. In full-service, there are two firms (in my mind) which are attempting to also take on the prosecution game - KCO and FM. The name of the game with these firms is volume, even if it comes at the cost of lower prices. Result: the usually under-staffed associate team takes the brunt. But, owing to being full-service, they often get work outside of prosecution/litigation/core IP as well (such as metrology advisory, even a little bit of data privacy compliance). Personally, I believe I should have pursued a more general role than IP prosecution, as it is highly specific.
3) Lack of feedback: If you venture into IP prosecution. I have two specific gripes I want you to know: 1) In 2026, I believe a substantial number of attorneys who have made it to the top, came-up at a time where IP laws were a little too lax. I thus find my faith waning a lot in such partners (usually people who have only done prosecution and are now partners in prosecution teams). I actually kind of blame allowing trade mark agents into prosecution. It's just a shitty mix where the attorneys in this field feel like more sophisticated TM agents without the rigour of law. E.g. - It's an entire industry who functioned on putting a Stamp Paper of INR 100 for allllll POAs without any of them even once consulting the Stamp Duty Act, ever - An.Entire.Industry. 2) TM Registry has a loooong waiting period. You can initiate an opposition and then have to wait like 6 years for an answer to come your way on merits, with no interim hearings, no update, nothing. Thus, the problem? You have a partner you can't entirely trust and a system which is not quick enough for you to truly see if your arguments bear any merit in the actual game. In some existential sense, I believe that not a growth has happened for me owing to that. I do read a lot and constantly attempt to get better sectoral knowledge and hope to upskill myself. I have also had good partners, so touch wood, I don't feel lost. But this feeling is there.
P.S - I must admit, I am writing this at a time of my life where I am frankly a little embittered with IP Prosecution and am actively moving away from it to a more transactional IP space. I know people who are having a lot of fun in this space too. No work is bad work in law if you're willing to think your way through it like a lawyer - meticulous and forensic. So don't take this to mean IP prosecution is a dead route.
P.S.S - My career (as on date) has been fully Delhi. It is possible other cities have better experiences. But I largely Delhi to be ahead in IP.
P.S.S - About the Feedback Loop. I must also admit, the TM Registry is becoming more vigilant, more stringent, and better. Thus, in 3 years time this comment might have been ancient and unusable to fingers crossed
Is the reported a dodgy fellow?
Instead of researching MCA notifications, you look up TRAI white papers. Any team/partner placing an emphasis on coding is largely doing it for optics, since no firm is using or deploying any internally developed tools in any case.
As far as skills - like any other area - have good research skills, know the latest updates in the area for examples how IT Rules have been periodically amended, the PROG Rules etc etc.
TMT is not a hype that will die lol, it's a growing sector.
You can hear more from an experienced partner in this podcast: https://youtu.be/i8nuVoesCJ8?si=Y3HcKNylsNFsH3yI
1. Purely research and policy - Freshers get 40-50k. Career trajectory may take you till 90k and all. Senior level positions may be around 1.3 to 1.5L.
2. Lobby organisations - Won't name them - but organisations which basically tend to publish research which favours a particular lobby of industrialists / sector players / strongmen - 10k to 20k higher. (Zero ethics though)
3. Political Consultancies cum Policy Organisations - Either from Right or Left spectrum - Depending on where you are coming from + your last CTC, they are known to pay the highest.
Hope this helps. Though the career growth plateau is very real in policy, until and unless you are smart enough to make it into the big corporates with their own policy departments.
Thinking about career in policy but unsure there’s growth?
However, one issue that has persisted, as rightly pointed out by Anirudh in his tweet, is the very same culture of loud-mouthed left-oriented students trying to push down any ideology they don't agree with, which has not only persisted but has gotten entrenched in the GB as a whole. The issue lies with the overall culture that is being propogated within the university and that needs to be countered with voices that arent necessarily RW but rather simply more open minded and tolerant.
People shouldn’t take politics so seriously and it’s not a good look for a senior advocate to be ranting on Twitter non-stop. I hope he’s okay.
https://www.economist.com/asia/2026/05/11/indias-pricey-private-universities-want-to-take-on-the-ivy-league
https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/indias-pricey-private-universities-want-take-ivy-league-w4sdc
Here you go
Will he stop his multi nation trips?
Will his party folks stop moving in 100 car cavalcades when they go to their constituencies?
Will those big families close to him stop using 20 cars in their cavalcade?
Hell no. Hypocrisy rules.
All the advisories for the janta.
Some guidance please from skilled and experienced ass kissers.
Yes, Jindal Global Law School has moved to permanent online exams. The residential campus you're paying lakhs for? Optional. The academic rigour you're paying for? Gone.
Students haven't attended a single class. AI is writing their submissions. And everyone is cheating in exams: openly, knowingly, and without consequence.
The market has noticed. A partner at ▮▮▮ has already said they will no longer hire from Jindal because of the online exam policy.
This is a structural collapse of one of India's most expensive law schools.
Do your research before you pay. The Jindal that built its reputation is not the Jindal that exists today.