Completely agree. Both the Senior Advocate and AOR designations need to be dismantled. Not only does it create a small group of beneficiaries, it also promotes corrupt practices. These designations are also a form of control over the Bar by the Bench and by the oligarchy at the Supreme Court. The favouritism shown to senior advocates must end especially to certain senior advocates who dominate the Supreme Court.

They are saying that the system has become inverted, with, mostly, toothless AoR’s that operate on the mercy of seniors who, contrary to established norms and conventions, are entertaining drafting, filing and other allied services that are conventional to law firms (and are routing these services, ie. services which fall outside the domain of a senior advocates practice, through their in-house juniors or AoR/ AoR firms in their network and now, laughably- through offices of more junior senior advocates). There’s essentially now an oversupply of senior advocates in the Supreme Court because fees, and market forces are pushing them into retaining/ furthering their drafting, filing and briefing practices (despite being senior advocates) - because many of them have far from established themselves such that they get briefed externally. The whole convention of designation has become a farce and needs to be done away with. For good.

Congratulations young man. You have revealed yourself as a rather naiive and blinkered fellow. Why do Senior Advocates prefer to work only with certain AORs/Firms? The answers are:

1. Certainty of payment. You'd be surprised how many counsels (even the most eminent ones) have to chase AORs/clients for payment. With their trusted AORs, payment is guaranteed.

2. Trust and accuracy. Recently, a plaintiff rep'd by one of the top SCs in Bombay was saddled with 50 lakh costs for suppression of facts. It was a major embarrassment for said senior. He told me that unless he had a briefing attorney like me, or he himself personally had verified all facts, he would henceforth not settle any pleadings or argue matters. Doubt he will stick by this though - his practice is far too lucrative, but, you get my drift. With trusted AORs, the SCs can blindly take their word for the truth because they know the immense amount of hard work and effort the AOR has put in to unearth facts and research the law. Since the relationship b/w the SC-AOR transcends the mere brief.

3. Joie de vivre. Many people don't get this. But ultimately, people, especially highly intelligent ones, want to be around others whom they like, whom they consider intellectual equals, and, who are dynamic, fun and stimulating. One cannot thrive in this profession if you do not have fun while you work. Highly intelligent folk find many people plain drab and plain boring.

I admire your idealism — it has a certain vintage charm — but the reality is rather more prosaic. India has produced a surplus of lawyers vastly disproportionate to the number of litigants who can afford litigation. When the profession outnumbers its market, the consequences are inevitable and rarely edifying.

Those without pedigree or patronage discover quickly that Supreme Court litigation is not a career path but a stress test. Brilliance is helpful but scarce; luck even more so. The genuinely intelligent do the sensible thing and leave for corporate practice.

As for the younger Senior Advocates: yes, their filing practices are unbecoming of the designation. But clients reserve premium fees for seniors alone. If one is not designated by the late thirties — and is not already a Shardul, Pravin, or Karanjawala — the market marks one as permanently “non-premium.” Early designations and discreet filing practices are the predictable result.

This is not decline; it is adaptation. The solicitor–counsel divide is collapsing everywhere, including Bombay, and the incoming generation of AoRs is considerably more competent than your nostalgia allows.

Which brings us to your proposal: abolishing the Senior Advocate designation. Admirable in sentiment, catastrophic in consequence. Remove the only substantial financial incentive in litigation, and the Bar will empty faster than a Delhi courtroom at 4:58 PM on a Friday!

Would suggest not joining. The cap marks practice at CAM is a complete mess at the moment - the OG CAM partners are not getting along with ML & team, who are operating as a separate silo. There is also a cold war going at the top level between YA and ML over who gets to call the shots. Would suggest joining Trilegal cap marks at BLR with VP and VS - lot of work but lesser politics and VP at least is a good human being.

Social media has been instrumental in the rise of lawyers like J Sai Deepak. Even in the case of older lawyers like Sanjay Hegde and Karuna Nundy, their appearance on news channels gave them wide recognition.

So is this a really important facet of legal practice these days?

It’s Raya Sarkar, not Raka Ray. Yes, she named Lawrence Liang and other leftists. Also shared screenshots of a leftist Jindal prof who clearly tried to groom her. And then Nivedita Menon wrote a whole article dismissing Raya as a “fingertip feminist”, ie someone who can only type from a keyboard.

There is, plainly, another dimension to this episode. The invitees maintain that they were misled by the organizers into believing that the 🇵🇰 delegation would not be participating in the debate at all. They further contend that there was an exchange of emails which—were it to be placed in the public domain—might lend substantive credibility to their account.

What is striking, however, is that neither side—most notably, the Indian delegation—has, thus far, presented any verifiable material before the media to substantiate its respective claims. In a situation of this nature, the absence of evidence inevitably weakens all asserted certainties.

Speaking only for myself, while I remain broadly inclined to accept the position articulated by the Indian delegates, their continued inability to produce even minimal supporting documentation—whether before the media or through something as simple as a tweet (which they have repeatedly suggested exists)—does introduce a degree of uncertainty as to where the factual truth ultimately resides.

I must also acknowledge a further hesitation: that any public request from my end for these alleged emails to be disclosed would almost certainly invite attacks from a certain section branding such a demand as “anti-national,” even as the delegates themselves would likely retreat to a moral high ground—eloquently arguing that they do not wish to confer further attention upon an event conceived for the benefit of “youngsters” or “children,” precisely in order to avoid the detailed public engagement that this issue, in fact, warrants.

Have seen laterals who moved to delhi tell of a better work life balance and less hours. The bonus does take a bit but they all seem to agree that it is worth it.

Does delhi gurgaon have less m&a work compared to delhi? What do PAs and partners in Delhi do then? Advisory and structuring?

Which law firms are expanding/building their tech and data privacy practice (in light of the DPDP implementation)? Is it possible that within 2-3 years data privacy will run a separate vertical like competition teams- with advisory and representation before Data Protection Board?

Have interned in Indus and its quite true every associate working (A1s, SAs and PAs) there felt like they haven't slept for months, and they also pay the stipend so late like 3 months after the internship end also the snack cost cutting is so true. I have also interned at Kochhar and Co Bangalore which is just right next to Indus Law, and it was a better experience as they provided us not only snacks but also lunch.

I understand your confidence in Indus, but there are a few things to consider. First, comparing pay across different practices is tricky, as compensation often depends on practice area and seniority. While Indus may seem competitive, it hasn't revised pay in a while, unlike other firms like AZB and JSA. JSA’s bill-sharing system allows associates to earn more, even if their base salary seems lower. Regarding work-life balance, while it may appear Indus offers a better environment, I’ve heard complaints about specific seniors making juniors’ lives miserable, leading to attrition. The Vietnam retreat feels like a distraction when basic perks like pay revisions and snacks are cut due to cost-saving measures. As for attrition, it’s not just partners moving laterally, many associates are leaving due to poor conditions. It’s not about being “delusional,” but about seeking a fair balance of compensation, respect, and a healthier work environment.

Vanshaja (2008) and Preetika (2007) are great options as both AoRs and as Counsels. Shivam (2010) has a counsel practice and does not file. All 3 of them are doing well in the Supreme Court. You will see them appearing across courts in criminal and civil matters alike. Have seen multiple courts address them by name and I think all 3 of them have also been appointed as Amicus Curiae in some matters too. You may see at least 1 or 2 of them get designated as Senior Counsels in the next round of senior designations by the SC.

HeY,

So i am Final year Law student, currently interning in one of the firms that is quite good, and i am interning with them for the second time, the firm primarily deals with IDT matters, but as i am nearing my graduation i am really confused as to should i continue with them, honestly i am keeping them as as my second option.

so for me i really want to get a job at ELP, LKS or Vaish, but the fact that i am left with only 4-5 months with my graduation i dont feel like i should intern with them as i am in a very final stage where i should really start with my job hunt!

so i would like some of urs advise, as to shouuld i continue with this firm as they might offer me a job or what else should i do bcz in these Tier 1 firm there i no way a fresher ( though with plenty of internship experience but no Post Qualification EXP. bcz i am yet to graduate) would get in !!!???

A Partner at a South Delhi firm:

1) (for late nights of working for female associate): Why're you worried about your safety while going back at 11 by rickshaw? This is not Gaza, it's a "safe" locality.

2) (to associates pulling continuous 9-12 days): What's your contribution to this firm?

3) Can you book my hair cutting appointment at this fancy barber, he's too busy always. Figure it out.
4) Can you run over to DefCol Market and grab these things? (vegetables and groceries)

Not far from them were their SAs who made associates do whatever personal work they deemed fit (writing LLM applications, LoRs because they apparently had "better drafting") then threw them under the bus in front of the partner when billable were discussed.

So glad I left.

One of my senior while assigning me some research work. Please make this note like how a first year associate would make by 8 in the morning. This while assigning me work at 6 last evening which including going through endless amounts of pages and deep-reading them. Both the timeline and the fact this task was assigned me during my internship, where I did not even know what does " draft like a associate means". It was extremely absurd.

It would not be advisable to join them as juniors. A fresher has little value to add, and a super senior has little value to give to a fresher. A fresher needs to first learn the "practice of law", rather than the law.

Most of their juniors are lawyers who themselves have juniors working with them.

Good morning everyone, I am a final year law student and am due to pass out in 2026. I will begin litigating with a trial lawyer next year in Hyderabad most likely. I wanted a few good names because I do not know anyone from these places personally, nor have I interned there until now. I would be greatful if you could give me a few names.

IIM A and IIM shillong have a separate shortlist for interviews for those who come from humanities streams/ social sciences streams. I secured an interview call from both with a CAT score of 94 percentile. Different story that they butchered me with on your feet quant heavy questions (even involving graphs) in the interview.

I am a recipient of such anti social behaviour during my days in NLSIU. These people need an excuse to release their suppressed anger towards society over anyone whom they can relate and easily make an example of. It didn't matter whether it is right or wrong. It also doesn't matter whether there is any shred of proof or not. All they care is for the end result to meet their expectations. Because the irony is if you turn out to be someone else, these elements of NLSIU will become all the more angrier of being wrong and then punish you for it by their behaviour for not being that person which they thought you to be. They will act as a unit against you without caring for your point of view and reasons. I have to painfully mention that even the professors and academic institutions were in on it. They even attempted to make me feel that I am delusional and imagining things. And if you say anything they have a ready made story of calling you mentally weak and in need of therapy. It is their go to story and first line of defence because they know they have wide array of discretion and can mold any story according to their whims. But when I see some people have also faced such acts, I just want to let you know it is not just academic rigour or failure of people to keep up but something dark elements of psychology at play to ruin your career by ruining your grades by ruining your social circle. Please take it from me it is very easy for them to give you a bad grades and simply states that he was also doing poorly and used it as a corroborative evidence later. These people have no respect even to their tagline how can you except to respect each other.

palash is the best. He's so good to work with. Never shouts on juniors. Team members have amazing work life balance. They never open their laptops after going home or over the weekend. He makes sure they are learning by giving constant feedback without shouting at them. He especially takes care of the senior associate and a0.

Siddharth Agarwal, Arjun Harkauli, Dayan Krishnan, Trideep Pais, Samar Bansal, Jayant Mehta, Diya Kapur, and Shyel Trehan.

Among the non-designated counsels, I’d pick Aman Ahluwalia, Arjun Harkauli, Debesh Panda, Samiksha Godiyal, Tanmaya Mehta and Satyajit Sarna.

One of them will almost certainly take you on—especially if you’re from a Tier-1 law school and not a T1 reject. If you are a T1 reject, avoid this cohort altogether. They’re deeply embedded in the T1 ecosystem; they’ll know you didn’t make the cut, and they’ll assume you don’t have it in you.

I would generally agree with this, but I think it would be unfair to provide a harsh assessment of the behaviour of OP's friends without knowing their socio-economic condition. Some people truly do need a job more than other people and perhaps it is justified to withhold information like email IDs to better one's chances of getting a job. It also isn't as if they are the only ones who have access to that information.

This GenZ exceptionalism narrative is blood-boiling nonsense. "Feeling so old"? You're 23. And worrying about Gen Alpha replacing you is literally what every aging generation does. "Will the kids after us be as good as us?" It's the oldest story in the book.

Back in 2021, sociologists sent a letter to Pew Research Center saying to stop using these generational labels. Imagine the gravity when a field like sociology comes out and says this is crap. GenZ, Millennials, this is all just a marketing gimmick, nothing else. These labels were primarily made for white American middle class. Even in that case it was flawed, but using it in India is plain stupid. Imagine saying people born between 1997 and 2012 share similar qualities. It's such a stupid statement. We completely ignore their culture, parents' income, and environment, and give them this blanket label.

"Most transformational generation"? "Broke regressive standards"? "Culture of inclusion"? Let's talk about reality. Go to any NLU and introduce yourself with just your first name without your surname. Watch how quickly people get aggressive asking for your surname. Casteism is still very much alive, just implicit now. We haven't broken anything. The same hierarchies exist, just with better PR.

Indian legal education is still the same except a few universities. Being a student at one of the good NLUs, I can tell you the quality of education is still crap. You're still dependent on the professor. Try telling them what they're teaching is wrong, and they'll tell you to go and complain to the VC and get them removed. Where's the transformation in that?

Every generation thinks they invented critical thinking and social justice. The batch before you thought the same thing. You didn't invent questioning the curriculum. Law students have always debated and challenged their professors. Calling it "epistemological and ontological assumptions" doesn't make it special, it makes it pretentious.

We are not special. Calling ourselves "digital natives" because we use Instagram and X doesn't mean anything.

Had you applied critical thinking, you wouldn't have written this post in the first place.

I'm 19 years old, to GenZ.