The timebomb is there only when education, job, urban planning are not expanded, as you said. Do that. No need to get all hitler.

Also, contraceptives are a strong hush-hush in our society. More so with the prevailing environment, how do you tell people to use condoms, when it is a taboo to even talk about sex?

Ultimately it's going to adversely affect the poor only.

No need to curb people's liberties for what is purely and simply a failure of the state. The state exists solely to provide education, health, etc. It should stick to that. Not attempt to regulate what people are doing because it is failing to fulfil its mandate.

clerkship is a wonderful opportunity if you get a 'good' judge. you learn the minute details of procedures in SC, a lot about drafting as you burn through diverse submissions (esp SLPs if you are so placed), and depending on the judge a lot about different forms of research as well. It is quite valuable for applying for scholarship for LLM (esp in the US unis, although they have started to catch on to the rather 'loose' nature of selection). However, in my opinion, if one shifts to HC after SC clerkship about half of the skills gained become redundant.

Here we go again. The usual qtiyas on LI dissuading people from doing LLMs.

There are people with both Indian and foreign LLMs who are doing well in India. Some are partners, some are Senior Advocates, some are generally counsels, some are bureaucrats, some are academics, some are activists.

Do an LLM for whatever reason you want: whether to party abroad, or do some in-depth research, or learn about a new field or build a specialisation, or just bide time. At the end of the day, it's your hard work that will make you successful. Even starting law at 40 years and working hard for 5 years will yield more success than starting law at 25 and not working hard for 15 years. The one exception are nepo kids, who can be successful no matter what, but there's enough space in the profession for non-nepo kids too.

So just follow your heart and work hard. Good luck.

(Please start by writing to blogs, it will give you a foundation for publications)

Pick a publication of your choice.Go to their website and read all the submission guidelines carefully and make a note. Look at the word limit. You are expected to write between 10% below that limit and 10% above (unless strictly objected). Check the topics/ themes/ practice areas provided, and pick a contemporary Topic based on that( upto 3 weeks before). (This could be new regulation, ministry guidelines, judgement, amendment)

You should find a 'PROBLEM' in the area which the contemporary development in your focus seeks to 'REDRESS'. This requires a lot of in depth research, put in that effort. Most of your article must be basing on this only.

It must contain sufficient significance in that area, and research on the repercussions it could have in the particular sector. For example, I picked AIF Regulations amendments 2022, which could affect Fund management and duration.Make a note of all such effects you believe along with reasoning behind it.

Then list the statutes, regulations, circulars, Regulatory body, etc responsible and attributable to your specific topic. Do read them thoroughly, if the topic you picked only made certain changes, but the area is still largely governed by the Act. List all this in a word doc.

Now go the publication website and look at previous volumes/ publications (last 2 years). Look at the structure, such as divisions of sub themes, abstract, description+ analytical blend in each paragraph, make a note in the doc. This is the accepted style. Each editorial board expects certain styles to adhere to, which is often not openly said.

Now start structuring your abstract/ introduction, adhere to the word limits in this, they are often the dealbreaker.

Your abstract must present- The problem you identified, how the new development redresses it, how are you contributing with your article, what is the structure for the reader, what are your suggestions/ comments etc( summarise in 2-3 lines only)

Now adhere to the style and structure your article accordingly. Provide sub topics and short paragraphs (check the previous articles for clarity). Divide the regulation into smaller issues and solutions. Answer these questions throughout the paragraphs-

What is the problem that the people invested in this sector/ area have faced before the regulation? What is the new regulation? How will it affect the sector? Will it solve the problems or be counterproductive (Most indian laws are, so this is easy for you)

Do they fall short of something? What? Provide your comments on how it can improve. Any other similar regulations in another similar setting that failed/ succeeded? Why? (Optional, don't stress and deviate to other topics, keep coming back to to the central theme)

Now construct a title for your article that actually captures the problem and solution provided by the development.

How much do seniors pay juniors? Part I: Delhi lawyers (barandbench.com) - Can anybody verify this?Sidharth Luthra - 25k to 2L per month

Sidhartha Dave - 50k onwards per month

Sajan Poovayya - 1.2L onwards per month

Dayan Krishnan - 3-5L onwards per month

Are they kidding or does this actually happen?

Don't be dissuaded by these trolls lmao, even replying to them is a huge waste of time (been there, done that).

1. Things have been shaky ngl. (There have been 2 incidents of protests against admin this year itself)

2. HNLU seems a notch above in corporate placements, everything else is more or less the same.

3. The students claim that it's improving but only time will tell.

4. Yeah, placements are growing each year but you should be mindful of the batch size of 180 students while accessing the number of students placed.

5. I Can't answer this one with credible sources but I've heard that the overall crowd is mixed (most of them being diligent).

6. Yes, if you're from a metro city then obviously you would feel a bit disconnected but the university manages to provide all the essentials from a physician, stationary and mental counseling to transportation to the city.

7. I don't think so. T-1 NLU does not have a definitive meaning, but let's assume that it's an NLU that manages to place 90% of its batch comfortably. For that to happen, HNLU has to focus on: a) The student intake quality (which is in decline for the past few years due to domicile cut-off decreasing year by year.)

b) The faculty (GNLU also has a similar scenario, but despite that, it manages to place most of its students, which suggests that even with a weaker pool of students as compared to other T-1 NLUs it performs similarly or even better in some cases)

And lastly, I'll also be joining HNLU so we might as well catch up sometime!

I'm a final year student (3 year LLB), wondering whether I should apply for an SC clerkship. I have someone who is willing to refer me, but I'm not sure if I should spend one more year "away from actually practicing" at either Delhi or Bombay HC. Does anyone have suggestions/experiences to share? Strongly considering applying for an LLM in sometime, and I do see how the clerkship would help with that. TIA.

This is quite old, but I started working here in the year since it was posted so here goes.

Students : like at least 90-95% of them really don’t want to learn anything at all. They aren’t the least bit interested in the law ,they’re here to smoke up and hook up for five years and get a degree. It’s quite disappointing for someone who did teach at NLUs and enjoys his students usually. The students are also really entitled and seem to feel like they can ask you to do extra work to make up for their shortcomings. I’ve had students ask me to take extra classes to catch them up on stuff they missed while they vacationed. I’ve had students ask me to schedule exams around their evening plans/ travel plans. I’ve had students ask for copies of my notes that they could take into an open book exam. There’s mass cheating- it’s not clever or anything but honestly it’s not worth the time and effort to pull these students before any university body. They don’t really build any skills and think they’ll coast on jargon and talking about their fathers.

I’ve heard students open brag about how they mistreat younger professors and how they can get away with anything because their dad will make a call.

Students here really don’t like it when you tell them they need to work harder too. And most people don’t - I gave up trying to motivate them in the middle of the term. You just can’t care about it more than they do.

Besides if you show the slightest inclination of not playing ball they will write petitions and try and cost you your job. Has happened to friends of mine. Who needs that headache?

I also know things are worse for female faculty- they’ve been harassed on campus in their classrooms and no one cares enough to help them.

I’ve taught at NLUs too- I know that things are quite bad there and covid leniency has led to a steep decline in acceptable standards- but I think the problem is 50X worse at JGLS.

The admin is fine - they will mostly stay out of your business if you don’t cause problems. It’s a very big university and no one has time to help or harm you. They will try to get you to do admin work - which is fine but most of it is useless. They will try to back you up when students complain and all - but honestly they also don’t have much power. The students are customers and at some point the admin will roll over and do as told. I’ve heard concerning rumours about grades being changed without informing instructors and corruption stuff with the rankings folks. You don’t really get too much control over subjects you’re teaching but they’re trying. It’s hard to steer a big ship like this and folks will often go overboard. Some of the HR type processes they’ve adopted are quite out of place for a university. There’s no faculty senate, there are no faculty meetings really- and there isn’t much free speech either. Your bonuses and salaries depend on feedback scores your students give so that’s messed up. Given all the research that’s out there about how those scores are not reliable metrics.

You don’t really get to institution build the way you would in smaller universities. There’s not much scope for organically growing things- it’s a very corporate atmosphere and you’re employees not faculty really. Besides trying to grow the institution from the ground up is kind of meaningless because the folks at the top have plans already and they’re just gonna try to push that agenda and you get into a lot of silly office politics trying to do these things.

What annoys me though is that each faculty member teaches core courses where there are atleast 60 students in a section and you are usually teaching two sections at a time so at least 100/120 students. That’s too many for one person to keep track of. Too many to meaningfully enforce any university rules about code of conduct or cheating or plagiarism. Too many to even take time and properly evaluate answer scripts rather than just pass everyone. I wonder why we have classes this big given low student teacher ratio but I try to not ask questions. There are other problems with admin stuff/ the political stuff that I try to steer clear of.

The academic environment is not there. It just can’t be because of how the place is structured. They’ve not built a university for faculty and students- they have built basically a hotel for customers and faculty are service people that come in and do their job and leave. There are few faculty offices so you never see your colleagues unless you go out of the way. There are research groups but they seem to be plagued with politics of the silly kind. There is no active mentoring programme for faculty because how will you mentor 200 something faculty? It’s a hard job to keep student faculty ratio at 1:9 and still have hundreds of students join every year. Something has got to give.

The pressure to publish in scopus to boost university rankings makes fools of us all. There is not as much time to do quality research and it is unlikely you will find people to collaborate with as faculty. There’s also a lot of attrition- most everyone I have met has some kind of exit strategy. No one I know is planning to stay long term.

Sonipat is a terrible place to live - the air is poison during winters and the heat during the summers can get quite dangerous. There’s no entertainment at all in the township. You could go to delhi for culture but honestly it’s a lot of time and money wasted in travel. Besides Jindal isn’t even in the heart of sonipat. There is no public transport at all so you’ll need to drive everywhere. And it’s quite unsafe for women from what I hear. The working class people are nice and humble and honest and helpful. The elite folks are all quite messed up. The locals will assume you’re extremely rich because you work at the university and will try and take advantage of that. The university is quite divorced from its surroundings. They don’t do much to be involved community members, do good to the surrounding areas , or to hire locally for medium- higher level positions- this does create resentment and conflict with locals. Creates an unsafe environment if not an unethical one.

The pay- honestly end of day money in account is not that far of Government pay scales - 10-20 k here there won’t change your life drastically. The housing they give is better than what NLUs do. But folks will still whine about it. I wish they encouraged folks to bike to work and create bike safe paths. rather than rely on these shuttles that come every hour or so- it’d be better for the earth.

A lot of these problems are not fixable for the model the university is running on tbh. You need lots of money - you want extremely wealthy customers who won’t think about money they’re spending- they won’t be the most motivated learner’s. Because folks are paying so much they do think they’re entitled to a lot and they’re buying a degree and teachers are around to be at their beck and call. It’s disrespectful as hell but how do you change that mindset? Especially when admissions teams promise them so much? How are you gonna tell your customers they are wrong or entitled or give them failing grades for failing work?

You need to hire faculty to keep pace with the growing number of students - you’re gonna hire like crazy- literally my interview with them was for 2 minutes. And not have a check on quality or really any systems to create anything for faculty. No real research collaboration, no real collegiality. People are nice - but only in the way you’re nice to strangers you meet at a buffet.

Would you rather spend the money you have building hostel rooms for more students who bring in money or faculty offices and libraries and communal spaces?

It’s too big a ship to meaningfully mentor younger colleagues or build some sort of community for faculty. It’s too big a ship to even check and ask if there are problems that need fixing. You can’t have a faculty senate when that faculty is numbering in the hundreds. You can’t have democratic decision making at all. You get orders from above is all. That means you can’t expect people to invest in institution building other than doing the bare minimum. Almost everyone is here for a good time not a long time.

There are exceptions to all of this. Students who are a joy, admin folks who are very competent and inspiring even, extremely ethical colleagues, faculty whom it’s a joy to know, locals who are warm and hospitable. But honestly you have to have a lot of patience and a lot of optimism to see it. And you have to have the ability to unsee and unhear stuff that’s not great.

Congratulations on your CLAT performance. I'll state this at the outset: RML and HNLU are roughly at the same level and there will be little, if any, difference in the resources and opportunities available to you at either institute. Any comparison is likely to be influenced by conscious/unconscious biases, so treat everything with skepticism and try to distill out objective pointers.

AFAIK, HNLU has a slightly better alumni base and it still ranks above RML in traditional rankings; I do know a few people who left RML for HNLU in spot vacancies. As to how advantageous a shift that is, I cannot say.

HNLU does have steadily improving placements, with several PPOs and campus placements at T1 and T2 firms along with in-house roles and prestigious LLM offers. Overall, for HNLU I'd say while it's not a T1 school yet, if you are diligent and persevering, you have very good opportunities available. I don't know how the placement figures compare to RML, but the same is likely to be true for it as well and I do know people from there who went on to do very well.

I think I speak for both places when I say that the general atmosphere is quite relaxed and it is up to the student to keep up with academics.

Being in Raipur does not pose any locational disadvantage.

As to whether things are improving under VCV, well, things are definitely getting better in all measurable metrics: faculty recruitments, alumni relations, industry relations, outreach programmes, new initiatives (credit courses with external faculty from India and abroad, mental health support/free counselling via YourDost etc). There are general internal issues but let's not get into that, that's quite irrelevant.

The one advantage I see at RML, which sometimes makes me wonder if I should've gone there instead, is that you can choose your Arts major. At HNLU, everyone has to major in Political Science. At RML, you get to choose out of Psychology, Sociology and Economics. This may not be of any significance to students committed to becoming lawyers, but it was a big deal to me.

But when doing this thought experiment, of whether I'd have been better off at RML, I also consider that at RML, the students can be a little more.... boisterous. Take this with a pinch of salt because this is based purely on anecdotes I've heard, but yeah we heard that ragging etc is/was a little more intense at RML. Again, this was anecdotal, may not be representative of the student body as a whole. And it's not like HNLU is much more pious. So yeah.

Whether you ultimately end up in RML or HNLU, I will say this: while the gap is shrinking, some very material differences do remain between T1 and T2 NLUs. So make sure you work hard and, very importantly, stay abreast of opportunities available. Things you can do, things you can work towards. There are several things kids at NALSAR and NLS had been doing since ages that we never found out about/never thought we could do. Remote research assistantships under eminent scholars from abroad, prestigious competitions (Jean Pictet etc), interning at firms in UK, Singapore, Korea etc and ultimately getting training contracts.

As someone else has written earlier, junior associates don't know enough to add value at the deal structuring stage (pre-term sheet and term sheet stage). But you may still be involved in researching some finer points if your senior or partner isn't sure about a specific issue affecting the structure.

I think the right way of going about this is to first identify where you can add value in the beginning of your career and to do that as well as you can. If you work with anyone half decent, then they will notice if you go above and beyond and involve you in more complex parts of a deal with time and explain why some decisions were taken.

So, when I was a first year associate, for example, I knew I could proof read a document and know the finer points of secretarial standards better than my partner. I could also just hammer out more hours than my partner since I was younger and hungrier (and didn't have much of a life beyond work) and, so anything which was "unnecessary" in the short term, I was willing to spend time on that more than my partner. There is some "unnecessary" tax research that I did in the first or second year which has held me in good stead even today.

I also used to hound my partner to explain why a deal was structured anything other than in the most straight forward way. In more than one case, I had taken permission from my partner and spoken to the tax consultants of the client to understand why they took one view instead of another (after researching the two potential views to begin with). I also used to ask my clients to share their IC memo and deal thesis to understand where they saw value - I understood the deal better and that also made the diligence exercise a lot more targeted to where the client saw value and / or risk. I also always went through the FDD since that gives a much closer understanding of the business of the target.

When I was younger (and thanks to my wonderful partner who let me run with these things), this just seemed like the right thing to do, but I don't see a lot of junior associates doing this probably because all of this take more time, and when you're just trying to survive, you think of the immediate but not the important. If I didn't feel like I learnt something new and interesting in each deal during the first few years of working, then I felt like I wasted my time working on that deal. The grind is only worth it if it make you a better lawyer each and every time. There is no glory in the grind by and of itself. So, I positioned myself for the parts of the diligence which could help me understand the deal better and I did my best to escape working on the more routine parts of a diligence (usually, corporate and license sections are the best sections in a diligence from this standpoint).

So, if you want to understand and be involved in structuring discussions, then you will need to

(a) first reach a point where you can see the immediate issues in a deal without really requiring to think about them; and

(b) then you will need to get a decent sense of income tax (there is genuinely very little income tax which is relevant for most M&A and PE/VC work) and ideally get your basics of accounting up to scratch - read CBSE XI and XII along with a FDD report of a simple business (ideally, with only one business line and something which isn't complex like financial services); and

(c) always understand from your client why they want to do the deal - surprisingly very few people ask this question to their client - you must not accept the outline of the deal in the term sheet as a fait accompli - always understand it and question it.

If you do the above for 4/5 years, you will be able to add value and think of innovative solutions to the structuring problems before you.

So you'll have 90k/month in hand.

Rent a good 2BHK for 40-45k/month around Andheri. Share it with 1 flatmate, your rent will be 20k. If you want to cut corners, share it with 3 flatmates, your rent will be 10k/month.

You could live in 'less happening' areas a little closer to office like Sewri or Bhakti Park, but many people find that depressing and it contributes to burnout.

Utilities, Electricity, Internet, etc - 5000/month

Local train pass - 755/month. Go for AC locals if timings work for you. Ideally stay somewhere close to a Western line station for good connectivity to Lower Parel or Fort-Nariman Point, wherever your office is.

Andheri Maid- 3000/month (divided by 2 or 4 flatmates)

Rest is discretionary, you could subscribe to a dabba for 5k/month or drop 5k on a night out. Your call.

12LPA is comfortable enough even for Mumbai.

As someone has already pointed out, reach out to folks who have done the moot previously. If not from your college, get numbers of seniors who might have done the moot the year before (through friends from that college, LinkedIn etc.) and ask if they would be willing to either formally be your coach or at least answer a few questions.

Woah, congratulations for the rank! 🥳

I've let it sink in and now I'm quite optimistic about the prospects HNLU could offer if I'm serious enough. After evaluating and doing due research, I've came to the conclusion that it isn't really worth re-attempting and sacrificing an year. There is almost nothing that can be done in a T-1 NLU and cannot be done in HNLU, I've even stalked profiles of people who cracked HNLU last year and they've been doing good for themselves, can't really differentiate them from NLUJ 1st years.

The only thing is that you've to walk that extra half mile to grab opportunities, and if doing that saves me an year then so be it.

I would ultimately be loosing 16 lakhs or more if I switch to another T-1 college while having the potential to crack the same job at HNLU. So yeah, initially it is not the best feeling to be in HNLU but I think it will surely get the job done ;)

You don't need a coach, but it's always helpful to approach someone who has done the concerned moot previously - they'll be able to give you practical advice which would vary from moot to moot. Find people who've done the relevant moot on LinkedIn and drop them a mail. Most people are happy to help out (especially if it's an alumnus of your college).

One important tip that's often forgotten when it comes to bigger international moots is always know your facts inside out - it is quite often the case in international moots that teams focus so much on the law that the facts are given a go by (this is especially important in fact heavy moots like the Frankfurt Investment Arb moot).

Malcolm Shaw for international Law and / or Principles of International Investment Law by

Dolzer and Schreuer is a decent start, depending on what moot you're trying for.

I'll start with "pedophile god" of the woke left because such a comically stupid statement deserves to be addressed first, the guy that accused foucault, Guy Sorman is a conservative thinker that had a direct incentive to discredit foucault, and besides even that, he has also withdrawn most of his allegations

https://www.lexpress.fr/idees-et-debats/michel-foucault-et-la-pedophilie-enquete-sur-un-emballement-mediatique_2148517.html

Another article also analyses various testimonies from other sources and Sorman's accusations simply dont line up

https://lundi.am/The-Black-Masses-of-Michel-Foucault-the-Bullshit-of-Guy-Sorman

And even if Foucault was "the pedophile god of the woke left" that doesn't detract from what he added, this is one of the most influential academics of our generation whose work spans multiple disciplines. His personal character has nothing to do with this.

And the same goes in relation to Judith Butler, she's a horrible person, and even regrets writing that letter, doesn't excuse her actions, but how does this detract from her ideas?

It just seems like you're grasping at straws to debunk otherwise accepted ideas just becuase the authors are le woke moralists

No need to redact. Dam has come out in public and is candid about it (example below and you will find more).

https://humsafar.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/Accepting-Alternative-Sexualities-2015.pdf

Friedman is very much not the most influential economist of the 20th century. Keynes is, by a long shot, besides. Staying relevant to the topic though, Friedman's not an expert on legal theory, I've read capitalism and freedom and his work on monetary theory and his critique of fiscal policy. Friedman's political economy is an absolute joke and there is a case to be made that his association with people like Reagan caused the policy effects that led to 2008. His take on jurisprudence is archaic, and he is single-handedly responsible for the unhinged capitalist attitudes perpetuating climate change. Economists like stiglitz and piketty have critiqued his policies a lot and I'd suggest you read them

Sad to see so an overrated author like Judith Butler named. She is the Ayn Rand of the left: lots of hot air, zero substance, terrible writing style. I hope people also know that she is a person with zero ethics and defended a left-wing professor (Avital Ronell) who sexually harassed a male student and forced him to to sleep with her (don't know what you guys call that, but I call that rape).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avital_Ronell#Sexual_conduct_investigation_and_suspension

And, of course, I have a similar low opinion of Butler's guru Foucault, the paedophile god of the woke left .

https://www.aljazeera.com/opinions/2021/4/16/reckoning-with-foucaults-sexual-abuse-of-boys-in-tunisia

https://theprint.in/india/education/foreign-universities-can-set-up-campus-in-india-but-ugc-rules-out-online-classes/1299170/

Some key questions remain:

1. Will Manan Mishra and the BCI goons veto the entry of foreign law schools?

2. Would foreign law schools even want to set up law schools here? For example, Jindal offers dual degrees with Cornell, where one goes to Cornell after 4 years at Jindal and pays for a 2-year JD at in USD. Why would Cornell want to change this arrangment? Or would Cornell like to offer a 5 year JD-LLB in India and earn more in revenue?

3. Adding to question 2, ultimately will the colleges that set up campuses here be less prestigious ones, such as those ranked in the 200-350 QS bracket, rather than the top 100 or even top 200 bracket in QS?

(requesting featured status for this very important topic)

Today was a hearing in this matter. Some progress after years of adjournments.

1. NDA's application to initiate contempt against Bajrangi for publishing the news story in Pioneer dismissed because NDA could not produce any evidence to show that Bajrangi was behind the publishing of the news story. NDA's counsel could only state that there could be no one other than Bajrangi who could have gotten that story published. The judge (HMJ Navin Chawla) was very clear that contempt jurisdiction is quasi criminal and the standard of proof is high and contempt cannot be adjudicated on mere conjectures or surmises.

2. Bajrangi's counsel stated that a notice be issued to Pioneer to find if Bajrangi had any role to play in the publishing of the article. The judge was willing to issue notice to Pioneer but NDA's counsel requested that Pioneer may be directed to not publish anything pertaining to the notice to which the Judge refused and NDA's contempt application was dismissed.

3. The judge asked Bajrangi to give an undertaking that he will not speak to media about NDA's leaked data, and that if he makes such a statement then the suit will be disposed of. Bajrangi point blank refused and said that he wants to approach the media to expose the large scale tax evasion being abetted by NDA. The judge then passed an injunction order prohibiting Bajrangi from speaking with media. Bajrangi protested and stated that he will challenge the order.

4. Bajrangi's counsel also filed a O7R11 for dismissal of the suit as it does not disclose any cause of action. Judge issued notice. The judge did indicate that the entire suit is based on conjectures and surmises.

Please see the courses in the first trimester / year - download the bare acts and commentaries.

As trite as this sounds - first get a grip on first principle - then look at perspectives / views.

Understand the history behind the first principle (though hopefully your college will teach you this) - if not - read the commentary.

Your first port of call would be positive law - then the interpretation on natural law / deconstructive justice / left-right-centre-liberal perspectives.

Also learn how to read a judgment:

How to read judgements effectively | Harish A. Raichura, Advocate, Supreme Court of India - YouTube

Ugh, you love your white men and your commentators love upper caste men. Read Patricia Williams, Catherine MacKinnon, Prabha Kotiswaran, Judith Butler, Leila Seth,Ambedkar, Charles Mills and Kimberle Crenshaw. It'll help you understand the world we live in now. Also Amia Srinivasan who is not a law person but has plenty to say to make us think.

In what appears to be a good start of the year, three pieces of good news for NUJS.

First, Avinash Desai Reddy from the 2005 batch has now been designated as the first senior advocate before the Supreme Court of India.

Second, Rupavardhini Raju from the 2010 batch, who used to be an IAAS officer, has now joined Pembroke College, Oxford as a faculty member.

Third, Justice Indira Banerjee has now agreed to join NUJS as a Distinguished Visiting Professor, soon after Justice Lalit did the same after his retirement.

In the middle of all the chaos, controversies, naysaying and doomsday predictions for the place, it is good to know about such positive developments.

You can use quotation marks to show in text that it’s not work. Ideally quotes are only used when a particular thing is so well articulated that we lose something ib the paraphrase. Whether or not quoting something you should signify in text where you got that info from/ whose argument you’re talking about . Prof Lawrence tribe argues …

Type thing. The reason we do it this way is to be absolutely transparent about what our work is and what is already there

it is poor academic practice to directly copy paste more than a couple of sentences, even if you put quotation mark for the copy-paste and then provide reference in the footnote. If you read oscola citation guide it said that if you copy paste more than three lines you have to indent it. https://www.law.ox.ac.uk/sites/default/files/migrated/oscola_4th_edn_hart_2012.pdf page 8

so if you copy paste more than a few sentences of thought/argument, use quotes and footnote the ref you would not be caught for plagiarism but of course you can get reduced marks. Its best not to directly copy paste more than one or two sentences and of course you have to put quotes and cite the ref in footnote.

There are a bunch of books based on Indian jurists I'd suggest you start with so you get an idea of the legal system during independence and thereafter.

My Own Boswell

Roses in December

Nani Palkhiwala: The Courtroom Genius

Before Memory Fades

Supreme Court: The Beginings

Supreme Whispers

The anti feminists are hilariously wrong. Saying women dont face barriers to entry is simply untrue legal equality (which is still not ensured in much of the world) and equality of opportunity are two very different concepts. There are studies done that actually analyse and break down causes of things like the wage gap, and the majority of it still boils down to women being forced to bear the brunt of childcare and also the view of women as subservient, both pearl and sydney have no idea what they're talking about, they are literally just regurgitating 2016 youtube anti feminist bs that was centre of academic discourse like 30 years ago and was also debunked.

What people tend to forget about feminism is that it is largely an academic movement, and this academic movement has existed for decades and all these dumb points the anti feminist women seem to bring up boil down to "women are infantilised in culture and thats a good thing" but they dont realise that these same factors limit women in the workplace and financially.

The ignorance radiating from sydney and pearl is so funny because feminism isn't "hurting men" feminism is literally about dismantling the patriarchal systems that cause the high suicide rates and rates of depression that mens rights activist like to tout as "faults of feminism"

Every single statistic they tout can and has been debunked 20 times over, and the fact this thread exists serves only and only to speak to the ignorance that some of you still harbour, and its not a matter of "having discourse" there is an objective right and wrong here, a side that the statistics support and a side they dont.

The fact some of you are in law school where they teach you how legal ethics work or just actual working lawyers and still have a skull thick enough not to understand feminist theory is absolutely baffling.

Also the white haired lady seems to know her theory and its a shame the stupid people keep talking over her

Hello, I'll be starting with law school in around 6 months. I'd really like to have a reading list of any books that'd might come in handy when I do eventually start with it. I've an interest in philosophy so I've already read some jurisprudence books which are tangentially related (Rawls, Dworkin, some Derrida, and Sowell's quest for cosmic justice, which was extremely disappointing) but I doubt these might be relevant. I was planning on downloading a few books that were recommended to me by a friend (Learning the law by Williams and John Langbein's history of the common law) but I'd really appreciate more books in the same vein as the textbooks or the philosophy books. Also, would appreciate more recommendations about books related to political philosophy.

Why do you assume OP is a male and/or trying to attract a girl.

I know people will say I'm oversensitive, but the number of times i ask a fairly random question online and people automatically assuming I'm male / a man is exhausting. It's like they assume the default user is male.

Maybe it's "woke" to complain about this or be conscious about this - but all I ask is for this person to follow their own advice - "Make good conversation"

With an internet stranger - it includes not assuming their gender. Too much to ask? I mean there is about a 50 percent probability the person posting is female right? Why does this happening?

The assumption that arbitration is really as autonomous as it is theoretically supposed to be (especially in India) is mistaken. Dispute teams do work on arbitration and litigation matters on a parallel basis. While court holidays mean continuing with the advisory, arbitration and other work, a majority of the arbitrator's in India still comprise of retired judges. Thus, the method and manner of conducting arbitrations is pretty much the same as court proceedings. More often than not, arbitrators and counsels also take a break during the court holidays.

Work hours totally depend on the team.

Fundamentals + Reasoning.

People need to understand clearly the fundamentals that they are fighting for. Everything else is just a matter of to-may-to or to-maa-to.

It will turn out that neither left nor right will disagree on the fundamentals.

1. Respect for other.

2. Validity of the other's views.

3. Readiness to drop views that do not adhere to logical reasoning.

Stick to the fundamentals. Don't get carried by momentary phenomena of the daily happenings. Control your emotions and do not let them get in the way. Remind yourself of the fundamentals, which will help you transcend either camp and develop perspectives that can be progressive for both the camps.

There's a lot of space for this kind of a role.

Great initiative on your part to start thinking about these points well in advance. You should consider the following:

1) Timesheets: Follow the schedule set out by your firm. However, my advice will be to record your time everyday (if possible.) You should also track how much time are you spending doing each of the assignments and how you can bring it down over a period of time..

2) Patience: Develop this skill. Work, boss, colleagues, clients, opposite counsel, counterparty etc. will test your patience one way or another. While it is easier said than done, try to ensure that you are calm and not getting agitated. When I say calm, I am also suggesting working on your listening skills. Listen to other side (which can be seniors, peers in your firm) and then decide if their point/argument has a logic and answer basis your logic. Another important sub-point here is, whenever any assignment is given to you, take your time, ask your queries and clear your doubt before giving it to your senior. A well thought out work product is far better and appreciated than a 2 minute noodle.

3) English: Spend time on your writing skills. Broadly, you will be drafting emails/memos and legal documents such as agreements, resolutions, notices etc. Each has an unique drafting style. Spend sometime understanding these. I am not sure if there is a good reading material available for this, but if there is, please read it (and share the link here for the benefit) of others.

This is an attempt to change the goalposts, but I'll indulge. The shared Indian cultural identity and

Hindu ones are two VERY important distinctions. India is not Hindu, despite what J Sai Deepak claims. India is multicultural and diverse. Also Pre-Colonial India might have been non toxic monotheism, but modern India very much is not. The majority believes the state must impose their religious beliefs, not very "Non-Toxic Monotheism" of them wouldn't you agree?

Early Islam in India was definitely not toxic, the Mughals, as rulers, were very tolerant for their age. And as far as different laws created to appease religious groups, I agree with you they are ridiculous, so I think we should repeal every ban on beef.

As far as why campaigning for a Hindu state is stupid, the admin's comment points that much out.

Academic books are very interesting when not forced onto you by institutions, I have noticed despite the books schools asking you to read being classics, i enjoy them far less because schools and other institutions force them onto you.

The alt right points out legitimate problems but it ascribes them to a vague degeneration of culture, (usually its minorities getting rights or something along those lines) plus the problem with the distinction between government and capitalism is that they're the same institution. The state is there to enforce capitalism and capitalism exists to uphold the state. I agree many on the left have a problem with discourse and demonising those they disagree with. You must consider many on the left are not just fighting for an idea they agree with, it is usually their right to equality, opportunity, fair treatment, etc. So it'd be pretty infuriating if someone that benefits infinitely from the system simply opposed your right to exist because of who you are. Discourse should happen, but the "intolerant authoritarian left" are usually people that just want equality.

Focus on your grades as much as possible, attend all classes however unproductive or boring and make notes. Don't get into large groups of friends really fast, choose true friends who won't steer you from your goals. Don't be peer pressured into getting into relationships in the first few years, as it will affect academics and your career goals.

In your first two years, try to intern at all places possible, from corporate firms to litigation chambers, to policy/ research firms, to Legal education/journalism/startups. Don't be swayed by the money and tier 1 corporate jobs right away.

Try to network with the 5th/ 4rth years as much as possible, as they will help you with internships in the coming years. Try reaching out to the alumni too.

All this internship stuff reminds me that students don't understand a basic problem. This is a market that is controlled by demand and supply laws. All this "I am this and I am that..." or "I am willing to work hard to make a stellar career in bullshitting, etc..." are pointless. The reader of resumes on the other side thinks, "Another showoff...what's new here? Nothing".

From student level, drill it that we are service providers. We need to help someone else achieve their goals - businesses or litigants. Have you tried solving anyone's problem? What are the problems you can solve for partners of law firms that you so badly want to please? A business mind would think, what is the demand and let me supply it. The demand for partners is this: 1. Clients, 2. Fame / Recognition, and 3. Time. Let's consider each demand and what can be done on supply.

1. Clients:

I understand that most from middle class background won't know bankers, funds or CEOs to give leads to partners. So opening doors to client development is not a great activity. But I have seen streets kids who early on start networking and create referral opportunities for small or large work or just make introductions.

2. Fame / Recognition:

Here is where you have good opportunity to help some partner, particularly a junior partner achieve recognition. How? Invite them to write for your college blogs, moots, newsletters, conferences, etc. as speakers. If these don't exist, even greater opportunity to take leadership and start some of these. Lot of people hanker for this kind of recognition. They will be obliged to refer to you sooner or later for internships if not jobs per se. I see a lot of NLUs and Symbi kids being good at such relationship marketing.

3. Time:

Here, you can succeed the most. Instead of "pushing" attention seeking mails, have you tried to "pull" attention by doing something useful to your target market of law firms? For example, a key requirement is to know time limits in many laws. Have you written anything like compiling say timelines within the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996? Anything useful like a checklist for reviewing liability clauses in any contract? Such kind of useful material that partners have always wanted to compile but didn't find time to do it, attracts attention and respect. This is how you pull attention by being useful to others. Writing academic articles like "Principles of Zimbabwe's Competition Law" will get you kudos, but a partner reading thinks WTF is use of this to me? Write useful stuff. Then do it continuously. You essentially give evidence that you are a source of reliable, timely and solid information or analyses. This will bring people to your door as R.W.Emerson said, "Build a better mousetrap, and the world will beat a path to your door".

Interestingly, this skillset is same which partners use to be useful to their clients by pulling their attention. Start doing this from student days.

Good luck.

Just develop a good reading habit, listening to other people when they are talking, not allow existing prejudices to prevent you from learning from everyone, and allow for the possibility that many of things that you may have learnt till now can be wrong or at least perceived differently. Be kind, patient, polite and curious, but do not allow other people's opinion of you define your life and actions. Also remember not to compromise with eating and sleeping schedule and develop some basic exercising habit. Rest will fall into place. You are going to a fine institution for the next five years.

Possibly one of the best internships I've ever had. No clerical work or any of that BS. Just research oriented outstanding work which actually involves application of mind unlike my other Tier 1 internships.

They dont recruit much though, you may try your luck. All the best

Let me clarify, I am not a fresher. I had a couple years of experience before I attempted this. I made a list of all T1 partners who were big in my field. I researched cases they had recently won on their LinkedIn, articles they had written, Chambers/Legal500 rankings they had received. I spoke about what I was doing, what was unique about my learnings at my current firm in my cover letter. I emailed and followed up for a long, long time. It worked out. I know it sounds like bullshit advice on the internet, but i swear to you, it works.

its only students in law school who live in a bubble thats completely media created and divorced from reality that care about culture war nonsense. redirect your energy from all of this waste of time, write a good research paper, read a book, do course work more seriously, start a clinic at your law school to actually help other people.

you are choosing to define yourself with your politics. No one owes it to you then to look past it and engage in social behaviours.

choose to define yourself with something else- and maybe people will see you differently.

There are bigger questions of what this means to the 'public' in the institution. It is SUPPOSED to run on public money, not the money of the few hundred kids that are here.

Most scholarships that the university talks about end at levels of 4l, so there is close to no coverage for people from the EWS/OBC category who fall in the 4-8L bracket. Sure, the university may bring out more scholarship/assistance programmes for them, but there was little to no disclosure about this during the entire counselling process, and this may have very well deterred individuals who may have secured a seat here but couldn't pay the required fee.

Not every kid here rocks an iPhone, the larger student body after the increased representation in the batches is middle-class that comes from rather humble backgrounds. If you are blind to them and their experiences though, that's a you issue.

Even if EVERY kid here supposedly had an iPhone, and was well-off, I would say that it would have still been utterly wrong. This is because of the idea of public institutions at large. I should not have to go out and empty my parents coffers for an education, because(again as per government lingo) I have PROVED that I rightfully deserve to have a seat in this place. If I deserve to have a seat here, and I have gone through a public, transparent process to get here, I must be given access to it free from mighty incumbrances, further because it is the government that is seen to discharge its duties of dispensing education to the public. Why am I being made to pay so heavily for a government duty that I, directly and indirectly, pay for anyway?

I do not think you also understand the importance of NLUs, and the goals for which they were set-up for. The larger goal of this was to create socially conscious lawyers, and that is why they had to be public institutions. This goal gets crushed once you impose such a heavy financial cost on the heads of those entering this institution. Sure, law firm jobs are dominant now, but they may very well seem to be the only option once such a heavy fee is imposed on the heads of people that enter here. We may very well then be saying a goodbye to first-generational litigators or academics who would feel forced to only consider corp as a possibility here.

Comparison with IITs is unjustified, simply because during internships/career opportunities the average income levels are a lot higher than they are here. Even taking that case though, IIT Madras charges only 2lpa, compared to the mammoth 3.65 being asked for by the NLU Delhi Administration. IIT Delhi charges people at the same rate based on their income still.

Hello,
I am currently studying in a NLU after the 2022 CLAT (June) exam, and I too come from a tier-2 private college. Upon my enrollment I found the study schedule to be quite hectic because once the classes start, you'll get too much engaged in the course work such as writing quality papers, academics etc.

I suggest you get a hold of or at least have someone write your papers beforehand as soon as you select your topics, also much time goes in research for the dissertation, and being an NLU they don't compromise on the quality of work that goes into it.

Being a one-year course, the time goes by so quickly that you won't even notice.

At last, I strongly suggest you get a word with someone who is already in the same boat as you.
other than that choosing any top-5 NLU is fine because they all are equally rigorous when it comes to academics, yet for a better option I suggest NUJS

I have both read and understood Sai Deepak's work, and I do not believe in the shared cultural identity of a nation as pluralist as India, I think India's beauty and strength lies in how diverse we are, J Sai Deepak arguing for an "Indic" culture does not sit right with me because it argues for a hindu identity, a hindu state identity to me is pretty much the same as christian nationalism in the US. An argument for india's national identity from a secular platform is far more valid. This left you disavow is the reason the Indian nation exists. Though I digress, i'll recommend a reading list that should hopefully help you realise why J Sai Deepak's beliefs are deeply flawed.

1. Ur-Fascism - Umberto Eco
2. The myth of sisyphus - Albert Camus
3. The argumentative Indian - Amartya Sen
4. The nature of fascism - Roger Griffin
5. Left hand of darkness - Ursula K Le guin

I would recommend some specialised indian literature such as D.D Kosambi but i assume you'd just dismiss him given what happens when you mention anyone remotely marxist in the presence of a conservative

Good day!

I'll start with the question you asked. For me, I was born into a relatively affluent brahmin household, and that, of course, comes with a degree of privilege from the system. It took me a while to grasp this and come to terms with it, but when I was in my era of believing in things alt right, it often took a turn to an indian version of the pre-dominantly US-based Alt-Right philosophy. I was raised in a rather left-leaning household, but my parents never really tried to make me believe a certain thing. They just handed me books and left me to interpret them. And given that I was a child through all of this, I wasn't able to quite grasp the nuance in these books, my first bad experience started with the fountainhead when I was 7 or 8, it made me believe in this myth of a true meritocracy, so those people that need systemic support have an inherent flaw, this belief more or less subsisted until I was 15, I read more literature and was exposed to more viewpoints, my beliefs at the time I was 15 would be that the ideal societal structure would be an atheist objectivist society, which is unachievable and unfair for a myriad of reasons. The people that most often fall into the far right are deeply dissatisfied with their life, at least from what i observed, these people wanted a scapegoat to blame, it was always "if X didn't exist we'd be much better off" so a combination of unrealised systemic privilege, dissatisfaction with life, and a contempt to those they view as "undeserving" is what throws people into the far-right.

My transition back from the alt right started with research of climate change, and reading more literature, which is what had thrown me in it, in the first place, the book I would attribute my change to is The Archaeology of knowledge by Foucault, pretty much recategorised the study of history for me. I definitely don't believe politics is hard wired though, I am currently 17 so my viewpoints will definitely change but I feel like the shift towards conservatism is often motivated by a disconnect from the status quo (you're culturally connected when you're younger) as you get older (also richer) you feel a disconnect from both cultural and the economic state of the nation you reside in, so you often feel a disconnect to the political messages of the youth. My dad is almost 50 now, but he's still left leaning, I think he is so because he reads voraciously and keeps up with issues despite not needing to, so I don't think one has to shift to conservatism as they get older (most do) I also don't like a dogmatic view of politics, I think it hurts our prospects to move towards a better society, politics isn't an identity, it is a reflection of the beliefs you hold, and ever changing beliefs are a sign of improvement I'd say.

I find it rather hard to find common ground with most conservatives given they are diametrically opposed to my beliefs, a lot of them also disapprove of my existence (I am a queer person) i would be open to discourse between conservatives but so many often jump to their axiomatic beliefs.

Insightful post by Husain, Research Fellow at VIDHI

https://www.linkedin.com/posts/husain-aanis-khan-58b232136_legaleducation-diversity-access-activity-7013930979027259393-fdrj?utm_source=share&utm_medium=member_desktop

The recent fee hike at the premier institution of legal education, National Law University, Delhi from ₹163,000 to ₹365,000 will only make high quality legl education more exclusive for those who get excluded on the basis of their financial status. Just another example of how access is traded off for quality. This patter of exclusion exists across the NLUs and has been document by Jamia and NLSIU diversity studies.

The numbers are remarkable: at Jamia half of the entire student body at 49.9% had a family income of less than ₹50,000 per month. Such students at the NLSIU were less than even half of that at 18.9%. Students with a high family income of more than ₹300,000 per month were a mere 2.54% at Jamia. But, almost 6 times more at NLSIU at 14.86%. Those with an income of more than ₹100,000 per month were 21% at Jamia and NLSIU 53.09%. Students with annual family income of less than ₹25000 per month were 6.55% and 4.5 times more at the NLSIU at 29.9%.

Source 1: Husain Aanis Khan, Inclusivity and Diversity in Minority Central University (2020)

https://lnkd.in/g_XbPgWx

Source 2: Chirayu Jain, et al, The Elusive Island of Excellence - A Study on Student Demographics, Accessibility and Inclusivity at National Law School 2015-16 (2018)

https://lnkd.in/dN59yrgQ

NLSIU at present does not really offer any huge advantage in terms of legal education compared to other top NLUs, other than the tag and the alumni cohesion. As for the claim of senior lawyers just waiting for social media posts, that's just ridiculous. As someone who has had worked for IDIA earlier, I can say with certainty that it is notoriously difficult to get any financial support from most of that category.

Foreign student seats and NRI seats are different. NRIs still have to appear through CLAT and based on such rank, they are shortlisted. For foreign students, CLAT is not necessary. The NLUs are free to come up with any objective criterion for selection. Usually, plus two level marks are used on an equivalence basis to shortlist applicants.

Rent and travel depend on where you put up. I know people that live in Lajpat or GK with flatmates and give 15-20k as rent.

Travel can range from 200-600 a day depending on your preferred mode of commute (metro/cab).

Food is cheap if you hire a cook (5k/month) or if you find time to make it you

Cracked NLS by fluke? Aap hardworking ho ya genius? Maybe consider if you have a legitimate flair for law, because this is incredible.

Consider this - Legal Studies will be 5-7 years, based on your career choices. Employment options can be unpredictable. Corporate jobs pay quite well, but can be hectic and with very little work/life balance. Litigation is very difficult as a first generation lawyer, from the earnings perspective. Can take almost a decade to hit decent monthly/annual income goals. And legal practice is different from medical practice, and I will take the risk of saying that people do think that the world will work without lawyers, but doctors are indispensable.

Futher, medical studies can go up to 11 years - 5.5 Years MBBS, 2 years MD, Another 2-3 years in super-specialisation. Basis current scenario, it has been observed that a lot of people are not confident in practicing right after MBBS. They must pursue higher studies. And this is where it gets quite crazy, since we have very few MD seats against total number of candidates. But I really disagree with this - medical practice can start with MBBS, just like LLB.

So you need to consider your interests, financial goals, and how much you account for society's perception. Good luck.

Medicine is not something one should go into unless one is really invested in the idea of being a doctor. It is a tough course and hard life to begin with and we already have way too many doctors practising for the wrong reasons. Studying law is relatively easier and you can later branch into other career choices too based on your affinity, be it management, policy work, and many others. Getting a job after an NLSIU LLB degree will be easier, though in the long run a lot of people would say that relatively more people make more money as practising doctors than as lawyers, assuming that is a factor for you. I would suggest that you talk personally with people in the respective professions as well as those studying it at present and then take a call.

Unsure about going to NLS despite having secured a seat in it, because of exorbitant fee structure. Not securing a rank within AIR 20 makes me ineligible for the Aditya Birla scholarship. Yes, student loans are always an option but i am hesitant about going into debt when i am a teen. Having younger siblings, the last thing i wanna do is ask my parents for help and put them under financial stress. I tried looking for other scholarships, but everything i came across was either for people with an annual income below 6 lakhs or people who belonged to disadvantaged socio economic groups. Any suggestions on how to move forward, information on any scholarships i have missed?

Hi, as someone who's been both almost alt right and now leans left, the progression for me was the more literature i read and the more academically inclined i became, the more left i moved. The most fundamental thing we need to accept is, not everyone starts on the same level economically, socially, or anywhere. The fundamental difference between conservative values and progressive values boils down to the dismantling of hierarchies which help these people who have historically, and still continue to lack equality of opportunity.

It is also a factual truth that the US is more polarized not because the left has moved farther left, but because the right has moved farther right (overturning roe v wade, repealing protections for transgender folks, threatening to overturn gay marriage, the bashing of immigrants, the christian nationalist agenda the republicans have espoused) the US democratic party is where it has always been, centre right. The US democrats don't become left leaning just because the party they oppose becomes more right wing.

This "someone" is a PragerU speaker who makes a ton of money off making vague culture war videos. PragerU is infamous for never citing their sources and all their "sources" being questionable in their academic merit. I could sit here and debunk every argument she makes with sources, but its the same "HAVE WOKE LIBS GONE TOO FAR?????" that has been the conservative narrative for 2 centuries now. There are dozens of videos talking about how PragerU is bad and there are various academic disapprovals of the organisation too but the nail in the coffin is PragerU and other conservative commentators are funded by billion dollar oil companies that don't have the best track record when it comes to caring about human lives.

Also India and the US are more similar than you might think, we also lack a large leftist presence in India, BJP is ultranationalist and Congress is at best a classical liberal party, the "socialist" parties here have to operate in a capitalist framework and are already plagued by infighting over disagreements with things like caste (samajwadi party lol) and the only social democratic presence, CPI M has resulted in what is by all metrics that concern quality of life, the best state in the country, even Delhi under AAP, a party with keynesian ideals has seen incredible public sector undertakings.

Stop reading J Sai Deepak and pick up an actual book written by someone who cites their sources and actually has sensible things to say. (I'd recommend Cornel West or Angela Davis, Piero sraffa if you're economically inclined, also capitalist realism is a fun one)

Read: https://www.ril.com/DownloadFiles/FinancialStatementOfSubsidiaries21-22/Indiawin%20Sports%20Private%20Limited.pdf

Puttar,

Pammi aunty this side!

Aeons ago, I used to be married to a partner in a tier 2 law firm. I am a non lawyer. Our marriage didnt break down because of our professions- I am myself a busy professional and therefore was understanding of his. I would ask you and anyone else in fact humbly to pay heed to the following generic opinions of mine if you want to see some success in the long term in your relationship :1. Do not rush into settle down, this nearly 2023. Whatever time your law firm spares, take time out for dating- get to know that person really well.

2. Be in tune with your own emotions- if you are not ready for marriage or perhaps don't immediately have the bandwidth to handle a formal relationship, have the courage to say no to someone no matter how attractive the person is- its important that you be ready for a relationship before you find the right person for it.

3. Relationships come with boundaries- Please cut those apron strings if you haven't already. Let me tell you its a huge turn off these days. Women will be perfectly fine supporting your parents and living with them. What they won't be fine is your parents dominating the girls, intruding in your decision making process as a couple and choking both your personal lives in their own insecurity of losing their Vakeelraja beta to a girl. Your marriage and your spouse both need space and time. If other than just sleeping with your wife, you just make time for work and mummyji, beta tum single raho aur casual relationships mein hi hoya karo. Yehi best hai- sabke liye. In marriage you need to manage both your time and other relationships. Marriage is a clear balancing act between your spouse and your parents. You need to know when to support which party, when to oppose whom and when to back off. Sometimes as a mature man, you will be forced to stand up to your parents while defending your spouse. Please marry only if you are ready for this. Yeh hindustan hai. Lawyer ho ya na ho, Aakhir tum bhi kisi ke bete to ho! Aaj bhi talaaq hone ka ek urban reason yeh hi problem hai. Samaj lo aur sudhar jao !

4. Set clear expectations- discuss finances, your outlook on family and relationships, your professional ambitions. Make sure she discusses hers as well. If it matches, great. If not, see where you can adjust or accept. If its clear incompatibility, learn to say an amicable friendly no. Have no hard feelings if things dont work out. You individual happiness and peace of mind, cannot be tampered with for the sake of a relationship. If there's an I do in the horizon, make sure you go for premarital counselling ( The only downside is there are parts of the fraternity that are too conservative in their outlook, looking at tools like counselling with a condescending gaze or stigma- that doesn't bode well for modern relationships)
5. If you are a litigator. Don't litigate with your spouse or your date. ever. She will be forced to don her civilian hat and defend herself. Be her BF, date, casual, husband whatever, but the moment you become a lawyer at home, she will automatically turn defensive. I remember choosing to dump your Uncleji after his finely worded falsely accusatory speech where he abused his profession as a litigator and his knowledge of law.At home. With his wife. Needless to say I left him. No regrets there. I could either save myself against a veiled threat/blackmail or save my relationship. Eazy choice hai naa?. From my experience I would say, if she is a non lawyer help her build trust you as a person.
6. Reason rather than argue. Be open to reflections and introspections by yourself and with your partner. Please make sure you don't come across as someone who is full of himself and his work. 7.Please respect other professions. Disrespecting someone's profession is a sureshot turn off. You do not have to necessarily understand the nuances of the work, but respect it as your better half's source of financial independence. Please treat her as your equal. Makes sure she reciprocates.

8.If you are stressed about time managing around work, tell her upfront or take her help in working out some time for the two of you. Set expectations early on and stick to them. No need to act like an over anxious aashique during the honeymoon period and then go AWOL-Uncleji used to bail out on dates at last minute and pompously say that law was a jealous mistress. My extremely predictable reaction: cringe. By the way a lot of other professions/ organizations are extremely strenuous, think product managers, think consulting companies, big 4. Unless u work in a PSU there is no such thing as a 9 to 5 these days. Please wake up and smell coffee. Sure non lawyer girl will easily understand your schedule.

9. You need to work continuously at a relationship. And yes any relationship can work even if two people in the relationship are career driven and ambitious, working around the clock. Build a healthy support system, own your life, own major decisions in your life, as a couple, like building finances, saving, investments, asset creation, having and raising kids etc. Continue to continuously and jointly work on keeping your relationship alive and healthy. 50% of this is your hardwork and its the other 50% that's hers. Biwi doesn't automatically bring all of this on a nice sone ki thaali!

10. Don't pick or judge someone by their profession.In the face of bias, you risk losing out on a really nice person I still value the legal profession despite my messy relationship with Uncleji.

Yours Truly,

Abhi to single, but ever ready to mindle Pammi Aunty

P.S Sorry for the bahut lamba message puttar! Dil khol ke baat jo karni thi humey! Jeete raho beta!

First of all, lol. Second, what? I dont think you understand either marxism, neoliberal economics, or even austrian economics (hayek lol) you either have read none of the prevailing economic literature or are not aware the 2008 crisis even happened. Which btw was the exact cause of the policies friedman and hayek championed. Even despite this, just reading basic class 11th and 12th economics would've given you an idea of why neoliberal policies so often fail (think market failures) and despite this, you can observe the effects of neoliberalism all around you, the planet is warming, global inequality is reaching an all time high and the wages of the poorest strata of society can purchase only a fraction of what they were able to before.

Short answer: No, it doesn't matter. However, broadly, if you plan on doing corporate law eventually, then ideally picking up any commercial law moot instead of a human rights moot might give you an opportunity to network etc.

Also, always prefer a moot that either has reputed partner firms, or clearcut internships as prizes. You don't have financial responsibilities, so cash prizes won't do you much good, but I've seen a fair share of people get T1 internships through such competitions. In that light, the more low-key the moot is, the better it is for you — the Jindal-SAM tech law moot was an easy get that way, for instance, because there was hardly any good competition but networking with & impressing judges from SAM got people internships.

Overall, as a "seasoned mooter" with multiple international moot wins, I can comfortably say that moots don't have any inherent value and don't independently add too much to your CV unless you have the grades

"Hinduphobic regressive left" the use of the suffix "phobia" is hilarious here because phobia implies a systemic or cultural disdain for this group, Hindus face neither. Hindus control both culture and the system (Upper caste Hindus especially). So the argument for a systemic or cultural disdain for Hindus is absolutely just a conservative cope. As for "woke" being mis-characterised by the right, conservatism, from when it was created has always been about creating a threat and the promise of palingenesis. So poorly appropriating leftist beliefs is literally their fundamental philosphy.

Frankly your iPhone story is hardly an indicator of wealth. Let's say its an iPhone costing about 80k. It's very easy to walk into a Croma/Vijay Sales /Reliance Digital outlet and buy one on EMI. 12 month EMI will be ~7k a month. It's the most obvious example of conspicuous consumption, so it makes sense to invest.

Truer indicator of wealth would be when they start becoming unaware of price of everyday items like milk and onions. If they still shop for groceries themselves on instamart or blinkit, they aren't as wealthy as you think they are.

Writing this from my 25k Xiaomi, so what do I know anyway.

For any student who has cracked CLAT in this year, just a word of advice. Whichever NLU you get into, if you wish to study in one that is considered 'more prestigious', then please keep an eye on that NLU's official website for at least till the end of the first semester, maybe even halfway into the second. People do drop out, even if few in number. If you can afford it, you can still seek admission using your CLAT score, since most NLUs, being cash-strapped, would prefer not to lose fees of 4.5 years from a student.

Of course, whichever NLU you study in, if you maintain your focus and persevere as you did for CLAT for the next 5 years, then you will undoubtedly have a bright career ahead.

Good question but wrong forum. If there is anything that the bitter, jealous trolls of LI hate, it's someone studying abroad or expressing interest in studying abroad.

Anyway, my advice to you is to go abroad! Even if you come back to India, it's worth it! I have travelled multiple times to all the 4 countries you have listed, studied in one of them and lived in another. Both the academic and non-academic experiences these countries will offer you are worth it! In terms of a country-by-country analysis of costs, below is an estimate for someone who wants to live in comfort and have a nice social life (pubs, concerts, shows and weekend trips to holiday destinations)

1. US: most expensive but also offers the most opportunity, if you can crack the market. If you want to save costs, one option is the Jindal LLB-JD programme with various law schools (Cornell being the most prestigious) as you save a year.

Overall budget: Rs 1.3 to 1.6 crore.

2. UK: Second-most expensive and less expensive than the US. But if you study in Oxford, Cambridge or London and want to have a good social life prepare to spend a bomb in living costs.

Overall budget: Around Rs 65-70 lakhs

3. Australia: Third-most expensive. The Aus dollar has also plummeted since China started a trade war with them, after Scott Morrison's government publicly demanded to know how Covid originated. But while the costs of an LLM have gone down, Australia can still be an expensive place to live in.

Overall budget: Around Rs 50-55 lakhs

4. Singapore: Just a little less expensive than Australia. In terms of living costs, but fewer temptations than places like London or NY.

Could you cut costs if you cut down on your social life and live in simple accommodation? Yes, but that sucks.

It's true that automation and technological advances can lead to job displacement, and this is a concern that needs to be addressed. However, it's important to recognize that these changes also bring many benefits and can lead to the creation of new jobs. For example, automation can improve efficiency, reduce errors, and lower costs, which can ultimately benefit society as a whole.

Furthermore, the impact of technological change on employment is not a new phenomenon. Throughout history, advances in technology have often led to the creation of new industries and jobs, even as they have disrupted others. For example, the development of the printing press in the 15th century led to the creation of new jobs in printing and publishing, even as it made the job of scribe obsolete.

Ultimately, it's important to approach technological change and automation in a way that minimizes the negative impacts on employment while maximizing the benefits for society. This may involve supporting workers who are displaced by automation through retraining and other forms of assistance, as well as regulating the use of automation in certain industries to ensure that it is being implemented in a responsible way.

Hi all, I’m an A1 at a T1 looking to switch practice areas. I want to switch to a litigation/disputes team in either the same or another firm. How do people go about it? How difficult is it to change practice areas? I am still new to the industry so was hoping it wouldn’t be that tough, but will my 1 year experience not account for much if I were to switch practice areas?

What was your switch (to any different team) like and how difficult was it to switch? Looking for inspiration

This doesn't account for negotiations, commercial considerations, diligence, risk matrix review, and various other factors that go into being a transactions attorney. Software that spits out SPA/SHA isn't new, we've had that mumbo jumbo for a while. ChatGPT is fantastic for elementary drafting, but it will not replace even the most paper-pushy of lawyers anytime soon.

What a stupid way of calculating.

The correct calculations are the following:

General: 115 (approx 86 seats for all India but considering the past performance of Karnataka Students and the Domicile being horizontal, the All India seats will mostly go past 95)
SC: 36

ST: 18
OBC: 52
EWS: 19

Horizontal categories: 58 for women and 60 for Karnataka Students (Last year women's quota was not even triggered. The Karnataka Domicile is also horizontal in nature, and in the last two years not more than 15% has been triggered in the general category because students from Karnataka do really well in the All-India Merit itself.)

You can cry about reservations all you want, but the truth is General seats remain the same when a new reservation is brought about (by an increase of seats), thus, your seats are not going anywhere. Moreover, our public institutions desperately need to be more representative and reflect national composition.

I repeat: you know absolutely nothing about Bengal. If you do live in Bengal as you claim then you are either a ▮▮▮ Gen Z kid or someone who is a deliberately dishonest (▮▮▮). Let me school you about the history of the English-language newspaper industry in Bengal:

- Until the 1980s, the Statesman was pretty much the only English-language newspaper in Bengal, with the circulation of the now-defunct Amrita Bazaar Patrika being too small. The Statesman was opposed to the Congress because of the Emergency. CR Irani, cousin of Nani Palkhivala led the opposition in the English-language press (along with Ramnath Goenka of the Express). When the Left came into power, the Statesman also criticised Jyoti Basu and became an enemy of the Left.

- In the 1980s, the Telegraph was launched by Aveek Sarkar, with MJ Akbar as its editor. Akbar and Sarkar also strongly opposed Jyoti Basu, but unlike CR Irani they were fiercely pro-Congress and Akbar would eventually fight elections on a Congress ticket.

- In the 1990s, the Telegraph began to catch up with the Statesman in circulation, as it offered colourful supplements for a low price and devoted a lot of coverage to sports and movies, while the Statesman was seen as too old-fashioned and out of touch with the youth. By the late 1990s, the Telegraph moved ahead. In terms of ideology, the Telegraph continued to be critical of the Left and kept up its pro-Congress line, while the Statesman attacked both. Both newspapers also became strong opponents of the BJP. Post-Babri, MJ Akbar constantly attacked the BJP, while Irani and AG Noorani led the attack from the Statesman's side. The TMC only came into existence in the late 90s.

- In the 2000s, the gap between the Telegraph and the Statesman widened hugely and the Times of India (the new kid in town) eventually assumed second spot. The Telegraph was more or less neutral towards the TMC. The TOI was neutral and appeased the right people all around, across parties. The Statesman again made enemies across the board. Irani lost a defamation case filed by the RSS after an editorial accused the RSS of murdering Gandhi. Also, the deputy editor (Ravindra Kumar) was arrested by the Left front government after the Statesman reproduced an article, from the left-wing British newspaper The Independent, which advocated atheism and which Muslim groups found to be "anti-Islamic".

- By 2011, when Mamata came into power, the Telegraph was firmly the dominant player in town and the ABP group was also the dominant player in TV news through Star Ananda (now ABP Ananda). The Telegraph, ABP and Star Ananda shuffled between taking pro-Mamata and anti-Mamata positions, but by 2014 Aveek Sarkar became furiously anti-Mamata because of the RCGC issue (which I guess you know little about, if you are a Gen Z person). Aveek then acted behind the scenes to get the Left and Congress together during the 2016 election and supported the coalition wholeheartedly. But he got his fingers burnt as the coalition got thrashed. Aveek was then removed on Mamata's instructions and replaced by Arup Sarkar.

- As things now stand, Bengal is an industrial wasteland and papers rely on government patronage through ads. That's why the Telegraph has sold itself to the TMC, which even Newslaundry acknowledges to be pro-TMC and only TMC trolls like you don't. Arup Sarkar has given way to his son Atideb Sarkar, whose ethics are even worse. The Times of India tries to appease everyone, through pro-BJP reporters in Delhi and pro-TMC reporters in Bengal. Meanwhile, the Statesman (though still published) is nearly extinct. It is so debt-ridden that it has sold Statesman House in Chowringhee, one of the oldest and grandest buildings in Kolkata, to a property developer to turn into a mall. Also, MJ Akbar is now a BJP man.

That's the story of Bengal and its media.

Which modern nation in this world is following a 'free-market economy' exactly? All the governments pick and choose policies to benefit their countrymen over outsiders and their cronies over others. As for GDP growth, that looks great in reports, but sadly, does not often make any difference to the bulk of the populace, because the benefits are mostly taken by the haves and not the have nots. For an economy to truly grow and benefit everyone, the government should increase planned and focused expenditure on health, education and creation of employment opportunities. That will always require taxing the haves more, especially corporates. Trickle down economics does not work in reality, just like communism does not.

LLM from a decent UK college (outside London) will cost you around 20 lakhs (including accommodation but with a basic university scholarship that any foreign student with decent CV and grades can score with prep). If you do it from a place within London, it would go up to 25-28 lakhs. I am assuming that you are going there to study and not splurge. Comparatively, an USA JD will cost you a minimum of 55-60 lakhs (very conservative estimate, it usually costs more and scholarships are not frequently given either). The living cost is somewhat lesser though, depending on the state. Singapore LLM will cost you around 25, especially since they no longer have most scholarships offered earlier to Indian students and Singapore is a very expensive place. Not sure about Australia.

Ideally, a faculty should go through each assignment with that level of thoroughness anyway, at least for the purpose of providing feedback to those students who seek it. If someone already does that, then it should not take them any substantial extra effort. Moreover, assignment related vivas and presentation should also help in gauging the students' understanding of the assignment submitted.

The path is just complicated for Indians. It helps to know the UN languages. Your referees and relevant experience matter and then you need to have someone internally pushing for you. The last thing may be because they trust the person who recommends you, which could be a prof from a good university, or a nepo uncle. It's like everything else. Easier with connections or you can do it the hard way and figure out how to get there by making your own connections.

My take is that, instead of helping in de-jargonising legal documents/opinions/emails etc, it will help professional bullshitters (which is 90% of law firm associates) in bullshitting even more and well lol make things a bit smooth and fun for the associates, but replacing lawyers - I don't thing that's happening anytime soon. Maybe in the next 10-15 years if institutional level changes take place like judiciary using AI to hear preliminary stages of cases, AI being used for evidence, or governments using AI to draft laws etc etc, then some what of things that currently A0's do in the first two years maybe automated. One such example of a task that may be automated which comes to my mind is of an A0 who was in cap marks and was assigned the task to 'open' more than 1000+ files that had been dumped by the client and the task was to simply 'rename each file' with the name of the document and re-arrange/organise all the files in a separate folder so that it is easy to browse through the documents.

Essentially, its a yay! for bullshitters in the short-term. However in the long-term people with high level of subject-matter expertise should be more employable by law firms.

Lets see what ChatGPT has to say with respect to OP's comment:

"Thank you for sharing your experience with ChatGPT and its capabilities in the legal field. It is no surprise that the legal industry has been slow to adapt to new technologies, but it is clear that AI like ChatGPT has the potential to significantly impact and improve various aspects of legal work.

As for the potential threat to law firm jobs, it is important to note that legal AI is still in its early stages and is not yet able to fully replace the expertise and judgment of human attorneys. However, it can certainly assist attorneys in their tasks and potentially reduce the need for certain roles, such as document review or contract drafting. It is important for law firms and attorneys to stay up to date on the latest legal AI developments and consider how they can incorporate it into their work in a way that complements and enhances their skills and expertise.

As for the impact on litigation, legal AI has the potential to streamline and speed up certain aspects of the litigation process, such as document review and analysis. However, it is unlikely to fully replace the role of human attorneys in the courtroom or in negotiations.

Finally, regarding the impact on law school assignments and projects, it is important for law schools to adapt and incorporate the study of legal AI into their curricula in order to prepare students for the changing legal landscape. While AI may be able to assist with certain tasks, it cannot fully replace the need for a strong foundation in the law and the critical thinking and problem-solving skills that law school provides."

Also lets see what ChatGPT has to say for the above comment. Below is the response generated by ChatGPT for the above comment:

"Thank you for sharing your thoughts on the potential impact of ChatGPT and other legal AI technologies. You are correct that these technologies are not yet fully reliable or of high enough quality to completely replace human legal professionals. However, it is possible that they may eventually play a larger role in the field, particularly in areas such as research and drafting.

It is important to keep in mind that while legal AI technologies may be able to assist with certain tasks, they are not currently capable of replacing the expertise and judgment of human legal professionals. High-value legal issues will likely still require human supervision and checking, and it is unlikely that these technologies will completely eliminate the need for human labor in the field.

As you mentioned, it is also worth considering the possibility that plagiarism detection technologies may evolve to detect papers or documents written with the assistance of AI algorithms. It is always important to ensure that any work produced is original and properly cited.

Overall, the use of legal AI technologies is an interesting and rapidly-evolving area, and it will be interesting to see how they are adopted and utilized in the coming years." As expected - a very basic response.

"Be afraid, be very afraid" - LOL. It does help in speeding up a lot of mundane tasks for associates like drafting introductory emails, proofreading a medium sized chunk of text, paraphrasing, drafting basic notices etc etc. It can very well help in reviewing and drafting individual clauses of agreements, but I doubt it is capable enough as of yet (because some future software might be) to hold context for even a 20 to 30+ page long document.

LL should be afraid instead since we can now, using ChatGPT, build websites/applications (within a matter of days!) which generate instant news articles by using very trivial sources of information. Check out 'GPT Times' - https://the-gpt-times.eriks-studio.repl.co/

An example of a news article generated by it - https://the-gpt-times.eriks-studio.repl.co/article/1601348697370947584

I'm guessing transactions jobs will practically be finished in the coming years, though I still think litigation requires a bit of human judgment and strategy-framing, which bots can't do yet. I still don't think there's anything to be frightened about. Technology has always progressed, it's not like people have been put out of jobs and when technology gets smarter, so do people. Communicating with robots, desigining and programming them, refining and editing their outputs still require human intervention. I'd imagine legal researchers from decades ago being equally worried about computers and online research engines coming up and making their roles of flipping through pages and searching for judgments less significant.

ChatGPT is really impressive. During a recent internship, I worked on a certain task related to CA, 2013 and the relevant Rules. I spent 2-3 days skimming through multiple case laws and commentaries to find the interpretation of a certain phrase.

After submitting my note, I posed the question to ChatGPT just out of curiosity. Surprisingly, it gave me the correct and summarised position in just 2 paragraphs!!!!! I couldn’t imagine how impressed the associates would’ve been if I had told them this answer in just a few hours, along with some cases.

Needless to say, I absolutely abused ChatGPT while making my assignment lol. Just threw an article in the chat and it paraphrased the entire thing for me. Added a few citations after that and boom, mission accomplished in just 30 mins xD

I’ve noticed that ChatGPT isn’t that accurate when it comes to technical or skill based stuff like specific Python codes, or even competition level algebra involving quadratic equations, inequalities etc.

But for the legal “research” related tasks, where little application of human acumen is required, it does wonders with the amount of data it has gathered from all over the internet.

Humans are so desperate to kill their own jobs. I have never understood why for the sake of inventing humans constantly invent things that reduce the requirement of manual labour. You're effectively handing over your source of income to machines and robots. Why? Because it makes our lives easier and better? sure but how will access this easier, faster, and better life if you don't have the means ($$) to actually afford it? ChatGPT needs to be shut down or its usage should be restricted. It shouldn't be allowed to eat all of our jobs.
Also, what ChatGPT can not do is legal interpretation. Sure, it can research and give you the data but can it interpret terms or clauses of a contract? Can it apply legal mind and incorporate clauses in an agreement? Can it negotiate with the other party? Can it be relied on for confidentiality? There are more reasons why it cannot fully replace lawyers and legal work. However, it would still eat up the work of basic researchers, interns and to some extent junior associates. But all this for what? to make our lives faster? Do we really need it?

1. It is a numbers game, which you can understand if you see the numbers. No subordinate judge has ever been elevated to the HC before 57-58 years or thereabouts. On the contrary, several lawyers have been offered the position even before they turn 50. This is a deliberate ploy to keep the former away from being CJ or get further elevated to the SC.

2. The evidence lies in the fact that even the collegium has never made sufficient number of recommendations to fill the vacancies at any given time! The government further culls the number by sitting on a few, but that does not mean that enough recos are being made to begin with!

As someone who has actually taken the Harry Potter course at NUJS, I would like to differ from OP. The course does not deal with Rowling as an individual, but the narrative itself. Nor does it glorify the characters or the story, or even Rowling's take on it. It is just used as a medium to help us ask questions. There was only one class discussing Rowling as an individual, and that too about her dealing with legal issues and how it could have affected the narrative. The current controversies simply do not have anything to do with what she had already written! On the plus side, the course did deal with issues like contract, family law, economic analysis, criminal law, socio-political aspects including gender rights and discrimination and even critiqued some of the shortcomings of the series itself.

As for Game of Thrones, it is set in a completely different world, where might makes right, compared to the relatively more identifiable world created by Rowling. I am not saying that one cannot make a course out of GoT. If you want to do so, please go ahead. However, one fails to see why it has to done at the expense of another course. So long as nothing hateful or objectionable is being taught in a course, there is room for all the courses that one may come up with. By the way, while you are at it, you may actually request the author to finish the series first!

Incidentally, I have taken other courses offered by the same guy and sought help from him on other issues outside the classroom too. He has never come across as either 'woke-libtard' or 'RW bhakt'. If he has any political inclination, he keeps it to himself at least within the classroom.

Speaking as a law school faculty who has also tested ChatGPT, purely from an assignment perspective, all the teachers who merely regurgitate the same old standard essay topic list for assignments year after year, and hardly go through the assignments for critical thinking and analysis, are not going to spot the difference. However, anyone who actually takes care to go through every assignment properly, would be able to spot both the lack of factual accuracy as well as the fallacy in terms of logical thinking. Sadly, such people are very much in the minority in Indian law schools, including the top NLUs or private universities.

Difficult to say without assessing your credentials, but there is no reason why you should not get a break. Again, have a reality check. The prominent law firms that you so often read in these columns have a preference for NLUs and / or those who have interned with them in the past. However, these are just a handful in number. For every such firm there are dozens of smaller firms which are lesser known simply because they do not thump their chests and publicize every deal they close. Also, these smaller firms also do not pay their way through to win awards and hence are now written about so much. The work that they do however can be just as complex as what the bigger names do. Try these smaller law firms for a start. It will take some effort in identifying them. Perhaps you can do some research to see who has broken away from the bigger law firms and started their own boutique law firm. Get in touch with legal head hunters as well. They have better industry awareness of such smaller firms. Several of these smaller law firms actually do not hire from top NLUs because they know that they cannot compete with the bigger law firms, and they are more receptive to hiring from smaller colleges. Take the time and effort to visit them in person. Ensure that your Resume is well drafted and contains no factual or grammatical errors. Be honest of your credentials. The cons here are that you cannot expect the same starting salary which the bigger firms offer. However, most of them will pay a salary enough for a single person's sustenance plus some savings. Start small and climb your way up. Avoid comparison with others because no matter where you are placed in life, there will always be someone who seems better placed. Let that not deter you. You need to win over yourself rather than winning over others.

He is speaking in the context of young lawyers (15-20 years exp.) refusing elevation directly to the High Court. These lawyers have a long career in litigation ahead, and their potential earnings as a lawyer are limitless. Naturally, they find no incentive to get elevated to the High Court and earn a meagre salary. This is not a recent issue, and is covered pretty well in Abhinav Chandrachud's book "Supreme Whispers".

You've a more than decent chance of top 3 according to CL Predictions. On a bad day it's top 5, so either ways it's a T1.

Unfortunately I managed to get about 75 marks hehe, HNLU it is, so I would say you've performed way better than the other 99% of candidates who appeared for it. Pack your bags!

As you suggest you are from a semi-rural place, a relevant question to ask is if you are entitled to quota benefits. If yes, then then then I think you still have a chance of cracking other govt exams with a pattern similar to UPSC, such as state civil services or BSF. You can also try for judicial service. Yet another option is academia, since there are reserved teaching posts.

If you are from the general category, it's very hard to get a public sector job, though you could still try academia via LLM CLAT and then PhD. Maybe you can join a lawyer's chamber and do an LLM on the side, to begin with? That way you don't lose out on work ex. JGLS offers online/weekend programmes for professionals and I think NLSIU is planning them too.

the legal industry has been snail paced as always to react, but this stuff is pretty incredible, I've tried using it to find loopholes/vagueness/ambiguity in contracts, draft boilerplate clauses, proofreadings, and a ton of other stuff, its not perfect, but its shockingly good

how long before law firm jobs are under threat? what impact will it have on litigation?

Further, law school projects, assignments are effectively dead. From what i understand, this can also paraphrase content, effectively running circles around turnitin. Law schools need to adapt or be obsolete?

Everyone here screams of mental health abuse, etc. by partners/ seniors (legit). However, it is seen that abusing seniors or naming and shaming people or taking about their personal traits, etc are taken for granted and acceptable here. Examples - how casually therapy has been recommended in the comment above. Or a meme a few days ago on an otherwise "hillar" law firm meme page where a partner's falling apart personal life was directly correlated to him being xyz at work. Or multiple LI comment threads.

Based on the above, the logical conclusion seems to be - (A) Being of a particular age or (B) spending time in a profession (when questioning the business model was not a matter of pride or a smart thing to do) or (C) when people did not have the luxury to leave jobs that pay for bills for higher consciousness sojourn - seem to be the marker "cancel" your mental health. Fair! I am sure there would be many other very logical reasons to the public ranting of people who satisfy the above parameters.

Anywho, since seniors will have to meet targets (in line with the existing business model) and obvious lack of time / other paraphernalia that comes with this job (handling logical juniors being one such lovely aspect) and age - one makes peace and says "mera mental health jaane do, sir / madame what may I do for you". Let the new world order prevail. Peace and harmony bro.

I just pray, by the time all of you (read makers of change / progress / changers of business models) come of age, may there be peace and harmony. May clients understand that consultancy as a stream has changed. May capitalism accept and adept to the changing society. Amen!!! Until then, sir(s) ma'am(s) - we look forward to your continued feedback and constructive criticism of us unfortunate lot.

P.S. - As many fellow LI readers (read - young thought and business leaders) would say - this post is blah blah blah. You are right my friend(s), I came here to rant. Super frustrated. Thanks for this lovely post / relevant question, ek therapy session ka paisa bach gaya. Keep'em comin.

The 'contacts' who vouched for KRay's ability included the likes of Menon himself. Nor did anybody question his ability to teach. Regardless of his position in any given firm at the time when he was hired, he already had an excellent industry rep, way more than any teacher at any NLU other than Rahul Singh. A case in point being he left the university and joined another firm as a partner. Nor was his recruitment botched up, since he was not hired as an assistant professor, but an adjunct professor, which does not require an LLM compulsorily under UGC rules (even in this year, there are at least six such people working at the same place with similar qualification and designation). You also avoided mentioning that his LLM was from Columbia, so no question of ability there, clearly. I agree that he lacked empathy, but he never 'cut any corner' as you are clearly insinuating.

There are many things, but would only highlight two which I consider most important:

- Be completely thorough with your procedural laws. Learn as much of the Procedural Codes that you can. Possibly also go through your HC's practice directions.

- Go through some good drafts of pleadings and get a grip over how to draft. Learn how to draft a document from scratch rather than copy-pasting from an already drafted template.

ugh dude. You're just spewing more and more ignorance. You're not just divorced from Indian reality- you're also divorced from American reality. Most Americans don't hate their parents or grandma and grandpa. I've been in the country as a student for a fair bit. They're normal people who like their families. Literally, only idiots who are divorced from reality and live on Twitter have such generalisations on "generational divides". Also- quite racist to assume all Chinese people are obedient yeah? Is it possible to be a normal person who views other normal people with freaking empathy for them? Or is that too much to ask from folks whose brains aren't done developing?

perhaps you should look at whatsapp uncles with a little bit of empathy- they dont understand how new media works and are only responding to stimuli around them. Consider that encouragement rather than shaming them or dismissing them or seeing their age as a character flaw is a better strategy to keep them engaged? what about the idea is puzzling? engage with ideas, engage with what people do- not who they are. The people ranting about kids these days are ranting about specific behaviour.

I teach young kids- I could tell you theyre not immune to misinformation- they're reluctant to do their research, they will believe anything influences tell them, they have short memory spans and cannot comprehend complex ideas. Anything that doesnt automatically work with their cognitive biases they are likely to reject. And they take criticism, even if it is constructive- terribly. being susceptible to misinformation is not a generational thing. one could even argue that with the decline of traditional reliable news agencies its hurting younger people far worse than it did previous generations. You want to look at polls on the politics of young people in the country? the results may surprise you.

In the SC, the arguing counsel couple of Mr Gopal Sankarnarayan (2001, NLS) and Haripriya Padmanabhan (1998, NLS) are decent paymasters and very popular bosses. Even their interns (of which I was one) get 12,500 to 15,000. Juniors get between 40000 to more than a lakh depending on the years of experience. Most important, there is a proper work life balance:

1. You don't have to go into office in the mornings and go directly to court.

2. Friday after court and Sundays are off, except for online conferences for the junior who worked on the case.

3. They make it a point to refer to juniors during arguments and acknowledge their assistance.

4. One of the juniors who plays football is allowed to go for training and matches when she has to.

5. They take all Supreme Court vacations off and juniors get paid. So you get paid leave of almost 2.5 months a year!

6. In addition, juniors can do their own independent work and get guidance from the two of them.

7. Right now they have 6 juniors all of whom are women. There have been men in the past, a few of whom still continue to work on matters after they have left.

You don't necessarily need political contacts. And UPSC will only open the door to the Indian Foreign Service. As for employment with the UN or any other International organisation, an international degree helps a lot. One person that I know did his LLM abroad in International Criminal Law after LLB from SLS Pune and went onto join Amnesty International; which pays very well, work is kick-ass and you get to visit some truly macabre places (if that's your thing).Some organisations and think tanks help you intern at these organisations. For instance, Think India takes periodic applications for an internship with Aniruddha Rajput (who himself is a lawyer), India's representative at the UNILC, which I have heard is absolutely great and certainly makes it easier to have an international career.

An LLM in PIL from Leiden or Georgetown may increase your chances (location is everything). Also, narrow down the kind of work you want to do. Typically, economics or IR related work requires specialised study from an Ivy League institution coupled with good work experience.

Dude, I empathize with you. The practical reality is that prominent law firms doing transactional work like (corporate law and M&A, IP) are not located in smaller districts. In fact, it will be difficult to find them in bigger cities of Rajasthan too. However, I'm sure there will be prominent law firms and senior lawyers doing litigation work irrespective of which district or city you are in. Your best bet is to try litigation. The gestation period is long. The formative years of your practice life may not be very rewarding. However, as you get a grip over handling court matters, your ability to handle things independently without our senior's help will improve. That's when you need to think in terms of going independent and building your own client base and being your own boss. On the transactional side, real estate law is also quite rewarding. Ultimately, the extent you succeed is directly proportionate to the level of responsibility you are willing to shoulder. Five years of practice under a good litigation lawyer should stand you in good stead and build a sold foundation to having a successful legal career. All the very best.

What kind of person thinks grandma and grandpa are uncool? I understand you're young and angsty and think every adult is an idiot- let me do you a favor and tell you, you have no idea what they've built either. You're just very out of touch. it's quite sad. and treasure your grandparents. They're likely nice people who probably did many things to improve the world.

While youre at it dont hate your parents either. There are better things to rebel against.

And whining constantly on websites like this about how everyone else had it easier than you and how your generation is the worst treated is not building anything. Grandma and Grandpa came from a generation where they were lucky if they didnt get polio by the time they were your age dude. your biggest annoyance is not having enough likes on instagram. Where english education was inaccessible and rare, and grandma and grandpa kept the family together and provided for their kids and the community while they were at it. and i betcha if you asked them questions theyd tell you some pretty cool stories of what they actually built. All of my grand parents were in one way or other involved in the freedom struggle. That cant be beat.

literally, no one is fighting a culture war except you kids. You picked the fight. I'm not a boomer. I'm a millenial - really millenial gen z cusp but im tired of this garbage the kids in law school are doing now. Its not a hate crime to say okay boomer, but it could be ageist for sure. Just like calling a woman a slut is not a hate crime, just sexist as hell. it certainly is not a hate crime to call out idiocy when you see it. Thats not abusive. Thats barely even critical. Just because someone is criticising you doesnt mean that they are abusing you. Learn the damn difference.

The problem with "OK Boomer", is that it dismisses opposing view points because of the persons identity- literally the ad hominem philosophy.

And regarding your "criticism" of boomer politics. I would say its grossly misinformed. Get out of your damn bubble. Read indian news and history and politics from time to time. Everything that americans do is not worth imitating. Literally the boomer generation- those above 65 in india now. They are literally people like Indira Jaising, Upendra Baxi, Madhava Menon, Sukhadeo Thorat, Manmohan Singh, They literally fought fights for righteous social justice causes. they didnt just tweet it and call themselves superior to anyone else.

The boomers in India actually grew up right around the time they had to go fight wars against china and pakistan- yknow, oppressive dictatorial countries. and fight an oppressive emergency government at home .

The boomers in india literally started the chipko movement, they started environmentalism! And to a large part they lived by those ideals instead of people who whinge about the environment while changing computers and mobile phones every year and indulging in freaking fast fashion.

This is why the boomer insult makes no damn sense in India. Your elders did not by and large have the conservative politics people in the west did. At the very moment of independence your ancestors actually wrote perhaps one of the most liberal inclusive constitutions imaginable. A constitution that gave every one regardless of gender, class, or caste, or race, the right to vote- america didnt do that for years and years after. To mindlessly take an insult that american kids use and to mimic their politics without being mindful or even freaking aware of who you are insulting and what they are about is- and sorry if you feel abused by this- it just is idiotic. There is simply no other word for it.

Also- we didnt freaking start this topic- in case logic is too hard. It was started by yet another kid whinging about having to study while having to study to improve their brains and gain skills at institutions that boomers freaking built so they can do a cushy law firm job that is all but guaranteed for them because of an economy the boomers built. just because someone called them out for being silly- does not mean they are automatically freaking victims.

Write a policy- stick to it. your biases as an individual should not weigh in this much. if you want to have an argument- you should do it from a regular account not from the moderator account.

Or Someone working with Senior Advocates in Delhi? Can someone you guide us with a paying counsel? I have talked to lot of people and they say senior advocates only consider people with foreign LLM. Also, contacts need to be there.

I would not be asking these questions if there was "minimum wage" hourly concept in India like western countries. That concept alone establishes a good level of social justice.

Big college Tag matters a lot in law firms. We got to know it very late. Where we are from, we did not even know NLU names. We knew just deputy collector, IAS due to news channels. We had no awareness.Hence me and my friends started prepared for psc and upsc but we all are so tired.

I have also tried comnecting with people on linkedin (now deleted). But hardly ever someone responds. Out of frustration I deleted everything and tore up my resume.

It is Marriage Season in India, recently met an engineer working at FCI. Freshly appointed. He said "India is the only country where struggle is glorified". His point was -"It is heartbreaking that we need to struggle for basic necessites like education, job and everything". Yeah, population. And politics. And corruption.

Coming back, only 2 guys got selected out of whole batch of around 80. Women of our batch got married to IT guys or businessmen and have become housewives. You know the drill. Some men are going to courts and getting nothing.

So, it can be really helpful. Take Care.

Yes, it is mandatory.

Yes, you can give it a year later, but preferably get yourself enrolled in the concerned state bar council as soon as you can. The enrollment will stay valid for some time even if you don't appear for the exam immediately.

Law firms will hire you for corporate practice even without the AIBE, but they will require you to eventually clear it.

You’ve missed the point here in your excitement to dish out labels like “pseudo-liberal”, haven’t you?

There are serious doubts about whether this guy even committed a crime in this case. I used Wikipedia because I didn’t have the patience to find and cite sources seeing as I’m writing a comment on an online forum and not an academic paper but here you go you lazy judgy ▮▮▮. Take your pick of sources that you won’t immediately label and dismiss. Or find your own, I don’t care.

The Hindu -

https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/tamil-nadu/former-cbi-official-says-he-did-not-record-perarivalans-confession-verbatim/article5384370.ece

Times of India -

https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/ex-cbi-man-altered-rajiv-death-accuseds-statement/articleshow/26283700.cms

The intent of the lecture was to learn from a first-person account of someone who lost 31 years, i.e. close to half of their only life, because an unethical police officer without a conscience manipulated the accused’s statement. 31 years. I haven’t even turned 30 yet and this guy had wrongfully been in prison longer than I’ve been alive. He was 19 or 20 I think when he was imprisoned. Can you even imagine how that might feel like? 19 / 20 year olds are usually second / third year college students.

Anyway, if you bothered to pay attention at all, the intent of the lecture was “…”.

No, kleptomania is a mental heath issue, where people often take things of no value. One of the absolute topmost Senior Advocates in India has this problem. As many people in Delhi will tell you, he has a habit of taking knives and forks at dinner parties. If he takes anything of value by mistake, such as expensive silver cutlery or expensive bowl, his assistant discreetly returns it the next day if you call and inform the assistant. This is not the same as laptop theft.

From Mint:

The reason IITs and IIMs command respect globally is for their extraordinary alumni, who occupy pivotal positions at some of the world’s top corporations and institutions. Indeed, it shows the extraordinary talent and prowess of Indians, many of them rising from small and obscure towns to make it to the IITs and IIMs after acing hypercompetitive entrance exams.

But while the best global brains join the faculty of American universities, including many Nobel Laureates, the IITs and IIMs struggle to find the right candidates. That is what separates the IIT and the IIMs from the best colleges in the US.

...

The top Indian institutions have still not stood out in original research, unlike their alumni who are calling the shots globally. In fact, even the IITs and IIMs are not known for high-quality and original research.

...

Indian PhDs often produce papers of poor quality, lifting and reproducing from international journals. ...

https://www.livemint.com/opinion/online-views/mammoth-crisis-threatens-india-s-iits-and-iims-11671014500207.html

Lawyers love to put themselves on a pedestal and talk about how complicated and challenging it is. The only thing truly challenging about it is the hours and work culture. Sure, there’s a learning curve but it’s no rocket science. A few deals and you get the hang of it. I’m 6 years into the practice.

After reading the title I was ready for being infuriated but you've put up a decent argument.

What I feel is that it's a myopic way to look at it. The legal industry has been on this spree for quite some time now, especially after the creation of IBBI in 2016. What we generally see in hirings are just T1 boutique firms recruitments, we tend to almost ignore the T2/T3/T4 firms that also expands steadily. The current trend projects that if T1 firms continue their spree then the it would be eating up the potential jobs takers from T2/T3/T4 firms. And this would ultimately result in a higher billable rates as a norm even for organisations that previously preferred a cheaper alternatives as the T1 are gaining more market share.

It's totally a speculation and there must be quite a few loopholes as well, but that seems to me a logical outcome of the current trend.

Charm of government is still there but steasily declining. For example, in UPSC one of the challenges is to finish paper on time. Is it a speed writing contest.

30-35% middle class are going abroad. Students are not even shying from going to European country. India is going thru a HUGE change in social structure.

IMHO, govt salaries are always bare minimum and will never catch up with what business class or pvt mnc job people earn.

Before LPG, in 1990s there were not many mnc jobs, our parents drilled that in our brains that Givt Officer is god. Yes, govt jobs are stable but recently J&k notified about contractual civil judge jobs. Soon or later , this may happen.

If you are from Nlu dont sacrifice law firm jobs for preparation of judiciary. Success rate is low.

I think this is ridiculous. Someone was committed of a crime. They spent 30 years imprisoned. The Supreme Court ordered their release.

Here's some additional context from his wikipedia page: "According to the CBI, Perarivalan confessed on August 14, 1991, and August 15, 1991 to purchasing the batteries making him the main suspect. Right from the start, Perarivalan had firmly stated that his confession statements were distorted.[17] He has since said that he was unaware of the purpose for which he was buying the batteries, and has consistently maintained his innocence.[18] Perarivalan would repeatedly say during his time in jail that giving a battery shouldn't equate to him knowing about the plot.

Perarivalan's case took a turn in 2013 when V. Thiagarajan, a former CBI superintendent of police, acknowledged to tampering with his confession in a documentary by filmmakers from the People's Movement Against the Death Penalty, that he did not take down his statement verbatim."

It's a lecture organized by a criminal justice reform research center at a law school to hear from a person who believes and maintains he is innocent but spent 30 years of his life in jail despite the fact that one of the investigating officers admitted to tampering with the accused's statement. And we don't want to hear about it? The guy is free now. The highest court of the land set him free. And we don't want to listen to a person who could have shared their harrowing journey with India's broken criminal justice system so MAYBE we can try to learn from it and fix it.

BUT NO. We're judge-y as fuck and there's no way we're open minded enough to change our ill-informed pre-conceived notions when somebody attempts to present a different perspective.

Shame.

The petitioners have sought a declaration to the effect that persons belonging to the LGBTQIA+ community have the same right to marriage as their heterosexual counterparts.

Denial of the same is violative of the rights guaranteed under Articles 14 (equality), 19 (freedom), and 21(life and liberty) of the Constitution of India, the plea stated.

An NLU alum is one of the advocates in the case (GNLU-Harvard grad Rohin Bhatt).

https://www.barandbench.com/news/litigation/gay-couple-moves-supreme-court-legal-recognition-marriage-registered-usa

Tier-1 firms in India now boast a strength of close to 700-1000 retainers, and many more may join the club soon at the current recruitment rate for freshers. Even taking into account attrition, lateral recruitment coupled with A0 hiring more or less ensures that the number remains static throughout the year. A lot of the attrition I have seen is in effect just swapping places.

A fresher joining in 2022 will be eligible for partnership in 2031. The firm, by then should have grown to at least 10x its current size (There's no point making someone partner without at least a certain number of people at a sub-ordinate level in the team).

This is worrying because no law firm internationally (barring Swiss Verein concerns) has an employee strength greater than 3k. Even the largest US/UK ones are responsible while hiring and do not take on any more than their revenue dictates.

The only consequence, in my opinion, of this mindless hiring spree will be a sudden slowdown in fresher recruitment in the coming few years and as a result a change from PQE-based promotion to a 'merit' based one where a 9 PQE does not just make you a Partner in line with US practice.

I'd love to know if you all share the same concern!

Thanks.

Update: Going by this morning's news reports, the issue of legal sector liberalisation seems to have been shelved in favour of a discussion on IP law reforms, particularly pharmaceutical patent protection under section 3(d) of the Patents Act (re Novartis case). In other words, it looks like the UK may sign the FTA without a legal sector clause if the Indian government grants concessions on IP protection and weakens section 3(d).

If that indeed does happen, it means the profits of desi law firms (in particular one family) matters more to Modi than the lives of cancer patients in India. Is Mr Airport the reason?

Things ended on a bad note at my first job and my old boss flat out refused to give me an experience letter. Very disconcerting at the time but soon I realised most lawyers or law firms for that matter don’t care about an experience letter. HR practices are really informal and if someone wants you on their team they don’t look for experience letters.

Another learning no matter how badly you end things time heals all rifts. You ex-boss or you can’t afford to hold grudges. Networking is too important in our profession. A couple of years later when I went in-house my boss very happily gave me an experience letter.

Not sure if it’s directly relevant but I’m a law student and I too use my Victus for all the assignments/academic work, along with the internship work. On weekends and at nights, I use it for heavy gaming like Forza Horizon 5, Halo Infinite, Warzone etc. Been doing it for more than an year and no issues till now. My last HP gaming laptop lasted for 6-7 years with A LOT of abuse, so you shouldn’t be worried. You’ll probably have to get a battery replacement in a few years tho.

My only major concern was while interning virtually with a tier-1 law firm, and the HR told me that the IT Dept would install some corporate monitoring software to alter/delete the firm’s confidential data that could possibly be stored on my device. They also wanted to block the ports and USBs for the course of the internship (which is a big issue coz I won’t be able to connect my guitar or audio interface to my laptop).

Considering my past experiences, I was highly sceptical about their IT Dept’s expertise. I was afraid they would inadvertently fuck things up, or ruin my gaming experience (via the background activity/trackers etc.) for the month. So I did some research and found a way to circumvent their entire scheme. Not sure if my actions were completely legal, considering the documents that I had signed while joining. (For the record- I have manually deleted all the “data” I acquired during the internship).

To conclude, your laptop will be fine. Just make sure you don’t allow the firm’s “techies” to touch your personal laptop.

Does the pan-India PLI scheme in specific serve any purpose?

In other words, what I am asking is this:

1. How many industries are actually in need of the PLI scheme (the EV manufacturing sector started this demand) and other industries (cellphone, toys, textiles, which copied the EV industry's demand)?

2. If the number of industries which actually need it is low, then why not have a single, cross-sector subsidy that goes out to all manufacturers? It can have a facility for simple loans and can be used by anyone seeking credit, which can be an MSME. a single-person undertaking, or even a regular entrepreneur who failed in getting funding and wants to cry in public. The cross-sectoral subsidy can have a production criteria and a P sign (for public) in the scheme. No other signs needed.

I understand that my cross-sectoral subsidy suggestion may not be regarded as prudent and economically correct, but it is based on practicality and efficiency. I do not see how industries can be discriminated by it any way.

(Now the answer: Gender-neutral washrooms are among facilitative measures that ensure that not only existing transgender students (even if it is a single student) get access to washroom, as a matter or right, like everyone else, but it also opens up these spaces to future transgender students. There is already talk of a quota for transgender persons, which must go through swiftly. That NALSAR and others are taking these measures is not because they are woke but because the UGC has sensibly asked all universities (https://www.deccanherald.com/content/459962/transgenders-rights-must-protected-ugc.html) to create transgender person friendly infrastructures - including restrooms.)

So you'll have 45k/month in hand.

Rent a good 2BHK for 40-45k/month around Andheri. Share it with a flatmate, your rent will be 20k. If you want to cut corners, share it with 3 flatmates, your rent will be 10k/month.

Utilities, Electricity, Internet, etc - 5000/month

Local train pass - 755/month

Maid- 3000/month (divided by 2 or 4 flatmates)

Rest is discretionary, you could subscribe to a dabba for 5k/month or drop 5k on a night out. Your call.

Unless you have better offers, take this, get some PQE. It's doable, been there done that.

In India?

No practices will stop hiring atleast for the next 20 years. After that once the economy is stagnant - Mid Level Income Trap or similar situations. Law firms will start freezing hiring. So forget any practice areas freezing hiring for the next 5 years. Even the worst teams would be hiring more.

But next 10 to 20 years, it's almost assured that as long as India grows at 6% GDP + - Law firms will keep on hiring..

Someone was telling - CapMarks and Projects teams would freeze hiring.

Are you even thinking what you are saying? Cap Markets will expand atleast for the next 20 years - $3 Trillion Indian securities markets will become atleast $7 Trillion. Hundreds of companies will be listed.

Projects? At the current pace. I won't be surprised even if Guwahati and Coimbatore has Projects team has a projects team. It's becoming too big to have a hiring freeze. Government strategy in more BOTs etc are even bigger reason hiring won't stop.

The reasons are -

1. Indian Economy will grow - no matter who rules. Indian economy will multiple for sure. Don't tell - modi vs Manmohan. It's BS. It's not because of politicians. It's just the natural trajectory. Of course unless some really horrible leader or political grouping destroys the economy on purpose.

2. Indian Law Firms are too small - the biggest Indian Law firm have less than 1000 lawyers. It's too small in a 1.5bn populated economy which is poised to become a $10 Trillion economy in 2030.

Even in some (relatively small) countries in Europe - there are more law firms with more headcount that India.

India has opportunity for more practice areas and law firms to expand.

So, we could safely say that no practice are would be freezing in the next 5 years.

The source is linked below in the 'featured' comment. I agree with the second part of your answer and have addressed the same in the linked project as well. I completed the project on a short deadline as it was for a competition by Agami and hence covered only judges on whom reliable data was available + did not address complexities like this (and recognised the shortcomings of the research). It is for the same reason that I have avoided sharing this elsewhere (and requested Agami to exempt me from adding it to the Justice Hub database). I am looking to develop it further.

- Author of the research

I'm an outsider. Here and elsewhere I've seen non court going lawyers complain a lot. They complain about their bosses, work life balance, inflexible workplace, even money at times. I'm curious why are you all into law. Is it money? Because there is a lot of money in tech. And you all will be surprised how poor the standards are over there. Your above average interpersonal skills are in high demand. And tech companies don't even care about tech qualifications anymore. They even take BA graduates if they have the right skillsets on their resume. Not every tech job requires people to code.

Work life balance - is pretty good if not top notch. Right to log out after clocking 9-10 hours is very very normal. On an average day, only 4-6 hours of work comes your way.

Boss behavior - You can literally back answer if you're 50% right. And none of them shout/yell even if you're 85% wrong.

Clients - If they're European/Aussie, you're subject to their standards. They even ask you why you're logged in on Friday evenings. And if if your luck is average, you get to travel.

Money - Depends on how often you switch.

How often can one switch - Nobody cares because its an ocean, there is no way your present boss will know your future boss.

IIULER is charging more fees than Jindal from its students and has neither:

(1) a permanent large campus or facilities like JGLS, Symbi, most NLUs, or even random places like Sharda Univ.; nor

(2) has pay scales for staff that correspond to the international outlook of the university.

IIULER, in its vacancy, states that it prefers people with foreign PhDs (LOL) and then pays the same like NLUs, recruits like procedures from NLUs, and has no career progression timeline unlike JGLS, Ashoka, BML U, or similar private institutions. How big a scam is this? Not only for faculty but students who will most probably get faculty with an LL.M. from GNDU (Guru Nanak Dev University).

Did some research, figured out the names of the counsels who handled SAM's matters, approached them in the SC while interning under a lawyer there, struck up conversations, eventually broached the topic of law firm internships, gave the impression that while I was not too keen on a law firm life, I still wanted to see how it goes and thus wanted to get it out of my way asap. This led to two of them promising to give the SAM people a call. One actually did. I had also started studying company law and contract law early, so that helped when the SAM partner asked me a few questions on the first day. That's basically it. If one accepts that in the absence of family contacts, one has to make one's own, and is hungry enough, it can still work out with proper preparation and planning. Mind you, this was a few years back, around 2014. Hope this helps.

First of all, great that you’re picking up yourself, yourself. Nothing in the world harder and more worth it :)

Read IMGL resources on gaming, NDA releases quite a lot of literature on gaming which is helpful. IndusLaw Recap focusses on gaming too.

Try interning in firms like NDA, Indus Law Mumbai (Tier 1), Spice Route Legal, Ikigai, Saikrishna & Associates (Tier 2) and Krida Legal (Tier 3) where they’re working on gaming laws.

IIULER Goa has appointed Srividhya Raghavan, Professor at Texas A&M School of Law as vice chancellor. This is huge! I do not remember any recent case when a professor of a top global institution with considerable experience was made administrative head of an Indian university.

https://www.iiuler.com/vc.aspx

You know this T1 firm and I both forgot that i was on probation there. A year after I joined (last week), i jokingly asked HR about whether my probation is over? She didn't get my tone i guess, and looked it up... And guess what, my probation wasn't confirmed... By the next day i had my confirmation letter in hand.

Usually i thought they give a letter confirming position or extending probation. In my case neither was done..

Thankfully it was backdated for me and me and partner had a good laugh.

PS: Im a lateral joinee.

You can try following:
1) Reading up the updates published by various firms. Wherever you eventually join, you can also take lead in publishing the relevant updates
2) Keeping a track of the amendments/circulars issued by MCA, RBI, SEBI, CCI (based on your elected practice area and your interest)
3) Needless to say, reading the case laws is also important