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?
We know the men who worked and had things tick along. In return there were attempts to ▮▮▮
Someone lead the internal lynch mobs from the shadows which clearly you're a part of. ▮▮▮. I can drop names but that would be a disservice to them.
▮▮▮ Defend your bread and butter, but expect a stink. Now when those people who rebuild on their own, you mock them. Just sit down.
then passport was like today's visa - it gave you permission to settle anywhere, the nationality laws were still being drawn up properly and enforcement was lax, india being within the british empire, gave indians the automatic right to emigrate to the UK. so obviously like the UK today restricts visa it restricted passport at that time
also, google path dependence, no insititution can diverge too much from its predecessor, even after French revolution the vestiges of monarchial system remained. independent india simply carried on the practices of the british (this is not a new idea a lot of writers in 1950s wrote about it, the now and then hated communists sloganeered - yeah azaadi jhoota hai - this independence is fake). so when we blame leaders in the past we cannot imagine the situation as it is now but have to cotenxtualise their decisions in their contemporary time.
i am not an apologist for the previous regimes but just want you to be appropriately critical with your thoughts and not just accept what politicians say about the past mistakes
Only T1 hacks pigeonhole themselves.
Have a specialty but take opportunities to develop working knowledge of other law.
• Out of multiple teachers in a course barely 1 or 2 are good in teaching
• They are very bad at responding to student query mails. Seems like the founder operates the query mail ID (which is also the ONLY mail ID of the platform btw) himself and that's why he barely responds
Never waste your money on this course despite the fact that their courses are available for fraction of worth of other platforms. You are better of taking the Rs100 - Rs200 courses of ▮▮▮ and ▮▮▮ rather than this.
Traditional PGPs are the only and supreme option there
I think I should take a prepare for getting admission to a good UK LLB and take a student loan
Most men liked the subject. If they didnt they left. Women make excellent workhorses.
So if there is a strong leader expect a lot of women under them.
If you’re choosing a CAM, avoid ▮▮▮ ▮▮▮ team. Doesn’t know anything.
Thanks
SEBI/RBI roles look lucrative but are hard to get through unless you have contacts.
If this nation is incapable of treating all its citizens equally and fairly, then this nation does not deserve to exist. As Burke said, “[i]n order for us to love our country, our country ought to be lovely.”
Good try SAN.