Sincere question: I am 2+ year Partner in a big law firm and have started exploring as I am still a glorified managing associate. Which are the big or mid size decent law firms that will not ask a lateral partner for book size and revenue guarantees? I think it is high time to make a meaningful transition. So any genuine suggestions based on reliable facts would be appreciated.

That's a very interesting article. We recently had an opportunity to have a talk with Nishith Desai. we explored the growth drivers of the Firm and the overall impact of the pandemic on the legal industry. He also explains the switch that he had made early in his career from the pharmaceutical industry to law. Here is the link - .https://lawwiser.com/nishith-desai-part-2/

Hey folks,

I am a lawyer with few years behind me practicing with a relatively relaxed team in M&A plus PE, etc. Off late, it is becoming impossible to keep up the time sheets, and/or mundane deliverables. Tools and tech has to an extent helped me, but deliverables that can be done by others in few hours usually are taking me into an all-nighter. I stay away from socials and media to conserve my time, but I am lost.

It is not that I am lazy or do nothing, as is usual with cases like ours, with increasing propensity my focus is driven towards other news items, advisory matters (I am golden when you need a opinion, connect the dots). I am however turning into an highly inconsistent and unreliable performer. My team is supportive, however it doesn't make sense to stick around for paycheck if I cannot deliver. I haven't yet found or sought professional help, because I could manage till now. My diagnosis was long ago, and I haven't had trouble even during my studies at law school.

I seek your counsel, because I feel from another thread that few of you seem to be struggling with the issue, plus advise on whether I should maybe pivot to another line of work before it becomes too late.

[Prior longer ADHD Thread here, for reference: https://www.legallyindia.com/convos/topic/186810-Lawyers-with-ADHD- ]

For any of you interested, GNLU also has a pretty decent student run magazine called Jury's Out.
Here's the link:
https://jurysoutblog.wordpress.com/

Another magazine which I found to be intriguing and is run by a GNLU Alum is Catharsis.
Here's the link:
https://www.catharsismagazine.com/

Happy reading!

The NUJS student magazine has already been there for a while, and is great: https://nujswritersblock.wordpress.com

Quote:

The MagCom of yore was, simply put, quite brilliant. Much has changed since then and this is an attempt at bringing back lost glory.

Writer’s Block is a space for all kinds of content. We encourage anyone and everyone to write about the things they are passionate about and we’ll put it out there on the big bad Internet. Apart from being a platform to speak about college and all its hijinks, we also give a select few the space for columns which will feature regular content on topics of their fancy. Get cracking!

It's funny how most commenters here think that their firm is largely billing clients on a hourly billing system, and that their timesheets are blindly accepted by the partners.

Quite a lot of the billing arrangements in India are still on a lump sum basis, especially cap marks, PE and M&A, where the fee is a really thin slice of the transaction value. Even if it is an hourly billing arrangement, your partner will make large haircuts to whatever the associate has filled in the timesheets, as your client should not have to pay for your inefficiencies.

That being said, most firms do have timesheet system in place. It would be more convenient for the associates if the firm just asked them to maintain timesheets for assignments which are have a time spent billing arrangement. But again, making associates' lives easier is nowhere on the agenda of law firms. Plus, those timesheets are a good way to track how you are spending your day, and most partners love to have that level of control over their associates' lives.

Don't let this deter you, in a few months, you'll know how to game the system.

Harish Salve’s returned income in AY 2011-12 was Rs. 50.5 crores: so the estimate of 100-200cr annually as total receipts in the subsequent few years would be quite a reasonable ballpark figure… https://indiankanoon.org/doc/115084903 (para 4)

About 7 years ago, Janak Dwarkadas’s returned income (Asst Year 2014-15) was Rs 32.85 crores. See para 2 of this order of the ITAT: https://indiankanoon.org/doc/51786764/

In Asst year 2011-12, his returned income was Rs. 28.84 crores. See https://indiankanoon.org/doc/120373345/

That’s a jump of 4 crores in a couple of years. In the 6 years thereafter, I would expect the jump to be quite a bit more.

Very interesting to note that in AY 1996-97 (when he would have been on the cyst of senior designation), his returned income was around Rs. 1.26 crores. https://indiankanoon.org/doc/168478889/

Applying the indexation index that is around the following amounts in today’s terms:
1996-97: Rs. 3.75 crores odd.
2014-15: Rs. 44.94 crores odd.

Note: this is returned income - professional receipts could be close to 1.5 to 2x that (because this is the post expense, post tax deduction claims amounts).

Please see it for yourself. I have attached my email communication with an MC firm stating that Indian students need to complete both PGDL and SQE that too before joining the firm i.e. Starting the Training Contract.

Best among all NLUs by a mile.

http://fiddler.nalsar.ac.in

Quote:

Introducing the official blog of the student magazine of NALSAR, run by an editorial board of undergraduate law students.

The magazine aims to document life in Justice City and beyond, and to provide NALSARites a platform to express themselves. Life at law school can get monotonous, especially with all the better aspects of campus life put on hold due to the pandemic. Fiddler on the Flag Road aims to encourage a wholesome discussion within NALSAR, beyond the world of law, and provide a much-needed space for the community to express themselves, including the expression of creativity, joy, humour, or anguish.

A lot happens amongst the hostel-goers of Shamirpet – be it the elections, rants about the woeful aspects of college, nuanced discussions on everything between the drunks, hidden talents being discovered, or the many controversies. NALSAR is never starved for content, and we are inspired by the need to create a community-centric and community-driven platform for the exchange of ideas, expression of emotions, exhibition of talent, and collectively record the present to be able to revisit it in the future. So explore the site, and fiddle away!

P.S. – For those understandably wondering, our name refers to the central avenue on the NALSAR campus – the Flag Road. It is the venue of some of the most random/thought-provoking/personal/intoxicated/joyful/nostalgic moments and conversations on campus. And we are all like fiddlers there, seemingly aimlessly wandering around on our own sweet tunes. To find out more, check this out.

Mohit Saraf who held 33% equity in L&L made 8 crores per annum as per revelations during the firm dispute. So that means, RKL, the managing partner who holds 66%, makes 16 crores.

Even assuming other firms like CAM/SAM/AZB/Khaitan are bigger in size and revenue, the managing partner (who hold between 20-70%) just be making 30 crores max. This is after running a firm with 500-100 employees.

Some litigating lawyers in the country make that much alone - Harish Salve makes almost 3-5 times that amount with hardly ten underpaid juniors under him.

Isn't that interesting?

I am a woman.
When I saw this question, I grimaced, fearing that the comments would be negative towards the junior girls. However, I am relieved to see the comments calling out the predatory nature of senior boys. 17, 18 and 19 year olds are impressionable. Entering a strange new environment of law school is daunting. Boys at my uni would carefully evaluate the physical appearance and dresses of fresher girls. They had the galls to speak out loud that after seeing the same old faces for months on end, it's exciting to see new girls. It's almost like they are hungry. Its Creepy. Its scary. The lascivious nature of the comments is obvious. It wasn't some harmless, fun boy-talk. It was pure objectification of young girls who were full of anticipation about studying law in NLU and excelling in their field.

Then these boys would help the fresher girls 'navigate the law school'. Some were really genuine and kind, thanks ONLY to them. But most others were excited to associate with new girls. And these naive girls barely knew the person. It's hard to decipher a senior's intention in a few encounters. Of course, the seniors would empathise with the juniors and appear all wise and intellectual. And isn't one of the coolest things for a new junior in college is to be within the sacred, enigmatic inner circles of seniors? Having a 'smart', 'kind' and 'intellectual' senior as an 'ally' and a 'safe harbour' in a strange environment is comforting. Then the power dynamics come into play. This whole power dynamics thing forms the essence of toxicity in relations.

I have a general observation here. Most of these senior boys I talked about would make the junior girl feel as if she is vulnerable and extremely important to him, cute but too pure for this world, in need of guidance from a senior boy and lost without the guidance of the said boy. She has potential but that potential can be untapped only with the boy's gracious help. Then the classic gaslighting follows.
I literally feel anxious, regretful, dazed and and panicky writing this.

Girls, please don't rush into any relationship in college. If the relationship turns sour, some men have a tendency to foul mouth women and talk the nastiest of things among their bro circle. This is traumatic. You will have to face that person for the next 3-4 years. The friend circle of senior men is no less traumatising in such cases. Talk to seniors, make friends with them. Its good to have a nice rapport with them. But DON'T RUSH into relationship or hook ups with them. Always give priority to your mental health, ladies. Sorry to say but law school is not the safest of all spaces.

Seniors, grow some spine, be more humane and don't manipulate and mentally harass the naive juniors. It's 2021. Objectifying women is so 2008. Manipulating junior girls world inflate your ego and make you feel super cool but actually, this only earns you a spot as the Honorary Mention in the List of Predatory Men.

With love,
A final year girl who is in anguish and curses herself for all the missed occasions she could have helped the women around her.

So a few of the therapists in the list have moved countries, few are unavailable. I'd looked this up a few months ago. I found an appointment with one from the list but I only got an appointment for 2 months later. Most in the list are good from what I hear. They're mostly holding sessions on WhatsApp video for now but it could make sense to find one in physical proximity so you can continue with the same therapist once (if?) the therapist would rather do this in person.
You'll have to see which therapist works for you, and that takes a few months. Be patient and you'll see it's helpful.
Divya Jain at Fortis Gurgaon is really good but I changed therapists once she was engaged with my firm (which is nice too) (I'd rather not use the services of the firm's therapist).

Attended one of the "tier I" colleges.
First 2 years, spent INR 3-4k per month by living frugally, eating only at the college mess and rarely at eateries, and limiting outings to pubs/restaurants/movies to once a month. Spent as little as INR 1.5K some months as there was no additional expenditure apart from meals.

Final 2 years, went on some trips, regular outings 2-3 times per week which increased monthly expenditure to INR 10-12k per month assuming ~1 drink every outing.

Broadly, apart from annual fee you will have the following expenses:
- Facilities - extra for college canteen/mess, additional utilities like laundry, cleaning etc
- Books and reference material for courses and exams
- Outings - apart from hanging out with friends, there are committee dinners, etc which may be obligatory to an extent. Generally towards the final year of law school you end up treating juniors/mentees to meals. The cost of these outings varies on the kind of place and drinks (eg. you could pay 300 + metro fare or 3000 + cab fare)
- Trips, if any
- Cost of participating in events like moots and debates nationally and internationally, which may or may not be reimbursed at a later time
- Visiting home on long weekends which is quite common especially for those who use semester breaks to intern in different cities

Introduce yourself (name, college, year);
Team, you want to intern with;
The period you want to intern;
Write a nice short para on what motivates you to apply there - talk about their deals/matters;
Leverage your past internships/publications/moots - highlight how that can be of help to the firm when you intern
End with a call to action (CTA)

Don't make it lengthy. Max 3 paras. Ensure there are no typos, and address the right person.

Good luck!

Hello fellow human! I think I might be the MOST qualified to answer this. Why? Because I dropped three years as well and ended up at NALSAR. Some of my batch mates did a two year drop. Someone was late in nursery admissions and did a drop, making it essentially a 2 years drop. So you did not fuck up!! Just make sure you make the best of the placements that NALSAR allows. After all that is why you did it right?

If I would have just continued in my never heard of law school, I would NEVER have landed a decent job. And look at me now! I landed a big 6 job on the day zero of NALSAR! I feel bad when I say that none of my old law school batch-mates ever even saw the door of a big 6 law firm. But this is the reality. And yes it is harsh.

So what would you rather be 27 and unemployed? Or 27 and living your dream???? Mind you, you will be 27 either ways.

What about the guy who failed in 10th and dropped one year. He is still two years behind! What about the guy who did everything on time but went to a mediocre college. And took three more years to find a decent job? He is also three years behind! So you are neither ahead, nor behind. You are just in your time zone.

You will enjoy your youth in NALSAR while building a great future potential. Just study harder than what I did :P NALSAR will give you a quality education that will change you for life. The soft skills, the great mooting-debating culture, the awesome library and the general exposure to the best law students of India would make you future ready.

Nalsar is a great college, great infra, great life, great everything and a very BIG brand name. I can understand why you did what you did. If it was a master's degree I would have bluntly said yes, but a BA LLB from NALSAR is a dream many wish for and you are living it! Age does not matter. At 27 you WILL be still YOUNG (and earning well in a Big 6 or corporate with a lot of future potential). I am in a big 6 and NLSIU/NALSAR still have that old world charm. NALSAR made my life easier. Even though I was not in the top 30, STILL I got a big 6 law firm offer. In a lower NLU at 40 rank they would not have even probably interviewed me. In my old lawschool, no recruiter even came for placement.

So no matter what ANYONE else says. NO YOU DID NOT MESS UP AND YOU DID NOT TAKE A DUMB DECISION! I almost feel writing to my past self 8 years back. Thanks for this opportunity!

Former tier-1 lawyer with ADHD Vhere, I survived law school just fine with regular therapy and occasional medications, but corp law at a big 6 firm was unbelievably horrendous. Having to sit and focus with the level of attention to detail that's needed and looking through DD docs for hours at a desk caused severe burnout and no amount of therapy or medicine helped. Eventually quit and started litigation with a chamber. Things have been much better since. You need to be able to try different things and choose whichever path works for you, whether it's policy or academics or in house work, litigation or whatever else. Corp firms and the kind of work, hours, and expectations are probably the worst thing for anyone with ADHD, and your mental and physical health are far more important. You could always try working at a corp firm for a while and seeing if you can handle, while allowing yourself the freedom to leave if things don't work out.

Recently been diagnosed as an adult with ADHD , the inattentive kind if you believe in that classification. I'd been a good kid academically always but suffered from the inattentive side of it and always had to work 10x harder to keep up grades and extra curriculars. Got diagnosed when I reached an incredible level of burnout that is really messing things up in my last year of law school. Any people who've made it, especially in firm life, with these challenges and what helped you?

https://www.ibbi.gov.in/uploads/whatsnew/e42fddce80e99d28b683a7e21c81110e.pdf

It's a bit outdated, given that there's a really important judgment regarding the IBC every few months, but it's still a very good doc to understand how the legislation works.

1. Try to get internship with under a judge. At least a tribunal judge. ITAT/CAT/AFT/NGT/SAT/NCLT judges are top of the game, one learns a lot there, sometimes better than even a HC judge. (Own experience, I interned under an ITAT member, it gave me exposure of tax laws)

2. Try studying Income Tax law. It is one of the toughest in legal circle. But if you are even minimally ok with that, your grasp at other laws gets shot up. (CPC/CrPC/IPC etc laws are too simple compared to Income Tax)

3. Being an intern under a senior is way better than being an intern in a law firm. But you need reference for that.

4. Gujrat High Court streams live hearing on youtube. Watching it is very helpful. (Do it ASAP as CJ Vikram Nath is getting elevated & next CJ may not continue this, as no other HC is doing this)

5. When Gujrat HC stops Youtube, go to ITAT website, they have hearings on cisco-webex with login ID & PW, just observe that, it is too rich

1. Study Study Study - Regardless of whether you are in a T1 NLU or the others, you CAN get into Big 6 firms without shiny grades. BUT grades do help A LOT. Grades are underrated in the initial years of college and by the time you'll realize their importance, it'd be too late. If you are in a T1 NLU, being in Top 20 is good enough. If not, try being in Top 5-10.
2. As someone above said, moots are overrated. While moots and specially grand moots (Vis, Jessup, Manlachs, OxPrice) teach you a lot of law and are a really big achievement (provided you do well), if you feel you are not cut out after trying 1-2 moots, drop it. No need to endlessly do small moots, they don't count for much.
3. Most cells/committees are overrated and add little professional value. Volunteer only in your free time.
4. Joining Law Reviews/Any Good Journal + Writing for Reputed Journals definitely helps, both in terms of learning the law + academic value.
5. Intern Intern Intern - Probably the most important part of law school, other than grades. Internships add most value to your CV and also help you a lot in terms of learning. It doesn't matter if you are interning with small lawyers initially because if you do well enough, eventually one of them will recommend you to a bigger platform and there's no looking back from there. If you are good and hardworking, you can carve out your own path through internships.

I too studied at a mid-tier NLU and here are a few pointers based on what I've seen/experienced.

1. CGPA is important, but it is not everything. I only had a decent CPGA in my first two semesters. It was probably because I was more into extra-curricular stuff like quizzes and football. I used to go for all random college fests and skip a ton of classes (we used to get attendance for representing our college, so it was a win-win). So I lost quite some internal marks (we have a weird marking system that has parameters like class participation, etc) and even though I tried compensating them by studying hard for the final exam, overall, I fell in the top 20-30% of the class. Now looking back, maybe if I had put in an effort, in the beginning, my grades would have been much better. But honestly, I feel that having a well-rounded CV and knowing your shit would count more than having a 10-grade point by mugging up the whole textbook. But if you plan to sit for college placements, CGPA matters as firms usually consider the toppers for interviews.

2. Moots are overrated. From the first week of my college, people considered moots to be huge and seniors who mooted were considered stars. So, everyone wanted to moot, and honestly, I don't think it makes much difference. Our Uni used to notify all random moots from XYZ Law colleges and I spent quite a lot of time in my second and third year participating in these ones. Yes, winning them gave us a bit of cash, but at the end of the day, the only thing I learned from doing these moots was the basics of that particular field of law. But international moots are an exception. Winning them is pretty huge. I'd suggest trying out mooting, and if you don't feel like it's your cup of tea, don't waste time over it because your friends are doing them.

3. Research papers are underrated. Honestly, writing articles or even blogs will probably teach you more than attending a class. There is no such thing as a bad writer and writing is something you get better at when you keep writing more. Start writing smaller articles and send it out to good blogs, including those foreign universities. You might get a ton of rejections, but often, they'll be accompanied by a review and it'll help you get better.

4. Get into the editorial board of any journal. Getting the position of any journal or your Uni's law review is a great thing to put on your CV and it would also greatly help in improving your wiring skills. If you find it too hectic, leave the board after your term, but trust me, it will be a wonderful learning experience.

5. Find out what you love and internships are important. Try to access yourself to find out what field of law you love and then try doing internships in that particular field to see whether you actually like it. I loved IP as a subject, but after doing an internship with an IP firm, I realised I don't want to be doing that for the rest of my career. Sometimes, you might hate a subject, but love it after you do an internship. So intern as much as you can. Be prepared to get continuously rejected, but there are tons of law firms and nothing is stopping you from applying everywhere. And it's okay if you don't have it figured out in the first 2-3 years. You will, eventually.

6. Enjoy your law school. You will be spending half a decade with the people around you and time flies quickly. Don't hustle the whole time and remember to have fun. Once college reopens, hang out with your friends frequently and go for trips. The five years you spend at your Uni will probably be one of the best times in your life. Don't waste it.

There's a lot of factors you are not considering:

1. You might not make it to partner at a tier-I firm. There's nothing wrong with that, most people don't. Do not start with the assumption that you will stick it out for 20-30 years, you might make yourself miserable. It might seem very achievable before you start working, but the considerations change a lot 2-6 years after you start working.

2. Some practice areas have the potential to make you a lot more money. M&A (especially PE) would pay you a lot more than IP or tax for instance.

3. At senior partner levels, your compensation will (at most places) be tied with your ability to get and retain clients. If you cannot get reliable clients, you will not make a lot of money. Unlike progression through the associate ranks, you will not make huge jumps in salary just due to experience.

As for starting salaries, depending on the firm, you could earn close to a crore, if not more, in the first year. It depends a lot on your team and work-profile more than anything else.

Generally, you will almost never leave a firm, especially these days, because you earn too little. For most people, even the prospect for earning crores before they are 35 is not enough to keep them in firms.

IMO you should work at a firm for a few years regardless. People on this forum discount a lot of the polish and skills you obtain as an associate in a firm. Being able to review, draft and negotiate agreements with firm experience will make your business life a lot easier.

Many of us who visit LI and are in this legal profession have either taken therapy or planning to take one. I fall in the category of the later seeking help here from the people who have undergone therapy and are doing better now. Please name the therapist who you have found useful (practicing in Delhi) in past or currently undergoing treatment. Practo., etc. are there but would prefer the community-recommended ones.

Writing this under my own name and will not revert to any passive-aggressive comments. I attended NLU Lucknow for a year, and by all account, it is a beautiful place and I loved every moment I spent there but caste is entrenched over there. In fact, caste was such a sensitive issue at the campus, when the cast of 'Aarakshan' movie wanted to visit our campus and do a discussion on the reservation, the VC declined stating that it will create unrest amongst the student body and this is the VC of a law school shying away from dialogue.
I had got into the college through the general category (had filled in the CLAT form as general, not OBC) but because RMLNLU had state OBC reservation, and my last name being very popular in Uttar Pradesh a lot of people simply assumed I had got in through the OBC category. This is despite the fact that on basis of CLAT rank, I was at rank 11 in a batch of 160 so barring 10 individuals everyone else had a lower rank.
The discrimination I faced was never direct and always very subtle. For example, if we were discussing career prospects, I was always told to aim for the judiciary ("tera to ho hi jayega" you will get in). It was never spelt out why I would get in but it was because the lower judiciary has a caste-based reservation.
The intensity was of a lesser degree for me because of a couple of reasons. First is the ability to communicate in English and give as good as I got. The second was the fact that I belonged to a middle-class family, and considering how diverse the crowd is at RMLNLU, even that was a position of privilege over there. The third was the fact that I am a native of Haryana with an above-average height and bulky build, and the popular perception was not to mess with hot-tempered Haryanavis. I would be candid here, I never did anything to get rid of that perception, may have in fact emboldened it on few occasions.
Of course, it was a lot worse for others, few SC/ST in our batch, the ones who couldn't have afforded RML without a scholarship, despite it being the cheapest NLU amongst all NLUs. They were always together in a group, aloof from the rest of the student body at large. The lack of confidence was such that they never really even tried to gel in on their own.
Of course, that being said, RMLNLU is not alone in this, I know of similar instances taking place at NLUJ and NLIU through people I trust. I wouldn't be surprised if this is an issue at almost all of the NLUs. The only good thing about this is that while not always, but in many cases, reservations does work out. I know of many from RMLNLU who without the support of affirmative action would not have been there where they are and it would be incorrect to say that they reached there only due to reservation. Most of them had to work twice if not three to four times harder than someone like me who already had an exponential advantage just by being brought up in a metro city.
Of course, all this is not to say that I am better than the rest. I have taken part in banters with close friends on multiple occasions against upper castes mainly Brahmins and Baniyas (most of my friends somehow belong to either of the two for some strange reason). My only saving grace is, as far as I know, no one can make an accusation that I have ever discriminated or even slighted someone due to their caste. Caste is a complex issue and I can only speak from my own experiences and cannot, unfortunately, offer much nuance as you can see it never really impacted me in a material way.

Just to clarify this calumny doing the rounds - Gopal Sankaranarayanan IS NOT Venugopal's nephew. Venugopals nephew is Vijay Narayan, the ex Advocate General of Madras.
Gopals father was in the IAS and retired in the early 90s before Gopal even joined Law School. His dad had been suspended from service by the Bangarappa government and Venugopal appeared for him in the Supreme Court.
Of course, Gopal is close to Venugopal, but that's because KKV demands such affection, and not only from his own chamber.
To shift from Bangalore to Delhi and start from scratch isn't easy. Rajshekar, Sidharth Agarwal, Jayant Mehta and others have their families in Delhi and that went a long way in building practise. Owning a home and having family support is a big thing in this profession, especially in Delhi. You won't find anybody who made it senior like Gopal did with such few years of active practise - he took 2 full years off from 2004-2006 to see whether he wanted to come back to law. Check his YouTube interviews out.

For me, I come from a financially privileged yet socially underprivileged family and I got into a top 3 NLU via affirmative action. Some of my observations are as follows:-

1) There is a lot of groupism among the people who came in via reservation. The other groups within UCs were mainly based geography (people from Maharashtra would hang out only with fellow Maharashtrians etc.) I think people from my community just have a better sense of unity and helping each other out because we’ve been through it together.

2) I never faced direct discrimination. I mean people didn’t even know what was our caste but all of this till we got our results for the first sem. Low scorers are usually perceived to be lower caste students and tbh that’s true mostly but the stereotyping is active discrimination. It seems like they are smirking on us for not being “meritorious” enough or laughing on our struggles.

3) We know how to give it back. Most of our parents are in police or central government positions or civil services and so we’re used to giving it back to anyone who is casteist. We don’t go for SC/ST act on every minor instance we instead are united enough to teach lessons in better ways.

4) Discrimination usually comes from close UC friends who become comfortable enough and think it’s okay to make “dark jokes”

5) We struggle with academics and placements which is the most active form of oppression. You can’t just give us a seat in a good university and then it’s adieu. Dude we need to get good grades, the bar should be lower for us. And why is there not a look at overall profile rather than grades. You’d barely find anyone in private jobs which is the most active form of discrimination

If you actually want to help a community and undo thousands of years of oppression, facilitate reservations at every stage of life including private jobs and promotions. We will get it someday soon inshallah. Jai bhim 🔵

I had the opportunity to be in two law schools:

1st was a tier 2 NLU, where a few of my classmates did make fun of students who came who were admitted via the SC/ST quota by using the argument of merit, Fortunately they were very few in number and their merit argument was debunked by some of my good UC friends.

The teachers fortunately did not make us feel different and out of place at all. Infact our Sociology and History professors went out of their way to educate the entire class about caste based discrimination it's History and the need for Reservations.

My Committee members were very helpful and never asked us for our Caste and treated everyone equally, This might be because out Committee chairperson (Professor) was a SC as well.

In the second Law school, Which was a Tier-1 NLU, which I joined after preparing for CLAT alongside my 1st Year, The experience was vastly different:

A few teachers asked us to introduce ourselves to the class by telling our CLAT AIR rank, and by attacking the concept of reservation.

Among my batchmates, the topic of reservation hasn't been picked up yet, so I don't know their stance and opinions other factor can be the virtual law school.

I did feel a bit left out, but that was more to do with the economic status and Connections. (Which can easily be linked to the UC privilege)

The actual reality as to how we SC/STs will be treated will come forward once we come back to the campus.

Overall my experience in my first Law school (Tier-2 NLU) was wayyy better than my time at the Tier-1 NLU.

If you're someone who got in through SC/ST reservation into the NLUs, how have your experiences been different from those of your unreserved counterparts?
Like any differences manifesting in socialization/treatment by students, faculty and admin/committees/feeling 'out of place'/any other banner?

P S.
This is not a thread supporting or attacking reservation, it's merely about the experience of SC/ST students from their own perspective.
Please reply, especially if you got in through caste-based quotas.

One thing no body seems to mention is the massive culture shock in NLUs. It’s something that hits you right in the face in the first semester.

Moving to a new place can be an overwhelming experience, especially if your kid has never stayed alone and has always depended on the parents for everything. Your kid will need to make friends there quickly, as they will become his/her support system there. A simple thing such as getting a car to travel, which the parents would provide back home, might seem infinitely difficult in these NLUs (most NLUs are in remote locations) if the kid doesn’t have friends to share the auto/cab fare with or the restaurant bill with(they charge a lot even for small distances near these NLUs). This may sound like a small hiccup, but when combined over time, they can make your living hell. More than teachers/ colleges, it’s the peers who will have a role in shaping him/her. But making friends can also turn out to be difficult due to culture shock.

By culture shock I don’t mean that different people have different food choices, or speak in different languages/ accents. While these are definitely a part of culture shock, it’s the other things which aren’t so apparent that one needs to be careful about.

We don’t give much thought to the process of making friends - for most of us (including me) it is an organic process where you find mutual interests and/ or you bond with people over time.
But in an NLU, where you have people hailing from different parts of the country, the way you speak and interact can vary massively. I learnt this the hard way that in these social interactions with your peers, your words (and non verbal) clues play a huge role in how they perceive you.

For ex- with some people, using abuses is absolutely unacceptable and considered uncouth, for others, it’s the most honest form of expression they can show (non-verbally) that they have accepted you as a friend, and that they are not “pretending” to be nice around you [Yes, some people confuse good manners with pretentiousness].
Or rather - how something said as a simple joke can be interpreted as an extremely rude comment by the others, and even viewed as extreme obsession with self [lot of people don’t understand exaggeration which is used as device to make jokes funnier]. These social interactions can seem harmless but end up be defining your entire college experience, as people are quick to judge, and you have to stay with them for the next 5 years.
(I am aware these above experiences are a bit difficult to put into words, so please bear with me)

NLUs were created to be a hub for diversity, and while the intention behind it seems good, it becomes a place where different worlds collide. The ugly side of it is when you put a bunch of inexperienced irresponsible youngsters in the same room, who have mostly never tasted freedom from their parents before, it becomes a cesspool for some of the worst activities which you can people imagine doing. (I’m not referring to drinking or smoking up)

I felt very out of place in my NLU, like I didn’t belong there. It turned me, who was an extremely outgoing person who loved to meet new people, into someone very introverted, avoiding people at all costs. Every interaction felt like navigating a landmine. I didn’t have a support system, and I struggled a lot....everyday day in the college was another day I dreaded. I tried to look for people around me to see if anyone else was going through the same thing, but couldn’t find anyone. For a long time, I kept wondering what I was doing wrong.

As I grew older, in my 4th/5th year I realised this wasn’t just happening to me, but countless other people. Just that no one was speaking up. Like me, all of them had stepped away from social interactions, and faded into oblivion. They were amongst us, but like the shadow around the corner that you don’t notice, they were inconspicuous.

The issue with trying to explain this to others is, it’s like discrimination..you won’t realise it’s happening, unless you’re the one facing it. The bright side is, most people do have a very positive experience and make lifelong friends in college. If you are from North India, there’s an extremely low chance of you facing this horrible experience (majority of the NLU crowd is from there so you’ll fit right in), but if you’re from a different part of the country, you’ll soon find yourself being ridiculed or laughed at for the smallest things which are very normal for you. Obviously not everyone targets you, but in your first year, when you are just trying to make friends, it does feel like the entire world (read 5 batches of college going kids) is laughing at you.

I hope this long paragraph has given you a different perspective and highlighted something that needed to be discussed. What I would like you to takeaway from this is, in the initial 1st - 2nd year, be there for you kid as he’ll need your support to transition into his/her adult/ college life. Don’t dismiss their concerns by asking him/her to just adjust. He’ll figure out his way on his own, but it will always be less painful if he/she knows you have their back and are willing to listen to them.
[Btw, I managed to survive college and I am currently a lawyer in a top law firm, so college life is not the end of the world]

Since I’ve written an essay by now, and it’s customary to end these things with a fancy quote, I would like to end this rather pedantic paragraph by this quote which almost became my college yearbook quote:

The Office, Season 7, episode 19, minute 14:45

In my personal opinion, this war has originated out of toxic freedom of religion ideologies. Religions (not just islam) must be regulated. Some of the most treacherous things have been mentioned in those holy books irrespective of the religion and we choose to ignore them in the name of freedom of religion. Islam, Christianity, Judaism and Hinduism are all extremely patriarchal and violent in nature, albeit different degrees. A huge portion of Christianity ignores the repressive stuff in Bible because they’ve been educated. It can be clearly seen that uneducated hindu families still practice some of the most repressive practices like ghunghat, baal vivaah etc in the name of freedom of religion. Islam has prescribed stoning to death as a punishment for some of the most minor offences. We tend to ignore a religion and it’s practices wherein women are objectified and men are allowed to have 4 wives. All of this under freedom of religion. Now it comes to bite back and all educational institutions for women will be demolished in Afghanistan. Why stay quiet? Have you ever looked into the oppressive curriculum taught in Madarsas? See I know all of this is very controversial, but think about it. In one part of the world, we are talking about queer rights and in other part of the world women are not allowed to drive vehicles and we collectively choose to ignore it. We collectively choose to ignore everything wrong with the society thereby lending credibility to Taliban and others. And now that evil is upon us we would blame it on US, Biden and Trump. Not to absolve them of any responsibility, we are equally responsible. Religion has always remained a back route to bypass and suppress individual rights and freedoms. Some rules in such religions must be put against the test of rationality. After all religion is meant to guide us and provide us with a way of life, not dictate it.

Can't guarantee that the university will teach you stuff, but internet definitely can if you work hard. Don't compromise on this investment. A good device is as important an investment as your college degree.

Consider:

1. Ability to comfortably type on the device.
2. Ability to comfortably attend virtual sessions (video + audio).
3. Ability to stare at the screen for hours.
4. Ability to carry this device around comfortably.
5. Ability to install apps/word processors, research.
6. Enough processing power to explore coding, basic video editing, browser heavy applications, etc.
7. Enough speed to browse learning and content writing opportunities so that, if you can't afford the best now, you afford it at the end of your first/second year, internet (twitter+YouTube+google+fb) is full of people willing to pay for stuff. There is a GNLU kid making YouTube videos on this. Check it out.

Notes can be taken in writing. A windows device will make your transition into workplace smooth.

IPad is overrated unless you are artistic person, in which case, get the pencil too.

I have posted this question.

Thanks a lot everyone. We are not the typical strict parent. I want him to enjoy life. The moment his CLAT results came we even bought him a bike. We don't check his phone or laptop. We are all for his freedom. Actually this question was posted here once he also asked allowed us. We have full trust in him.

But at the same time, he is a child as far as we are concerned. We don't want him to be addicted to some drugs or have bad friends who take alcohol, cigarettes, drugs or chase girls. You all are youngsters, when you become a parent probably you will understand.

Now it seems national law Universities will only open by 2022 - 23. After this covid fiasco. So he can easily spend 1 to 2 years at home.

Enjoyed reading this. Helpful to us.

The firm does not have enough lawyers when compared with other law firms, hence AZB lawyers are relatively over-worked (emphasis on ‘relativity’). As an obvious result of this, one gets to learn more in less time. You get more responsibility from the junior level itself. In terms of administrative hurdles, nobody can deny the fact that filling your TS on time, keeping your non-billables to the minimum are some of the apparent issues at AZB (not because they don’t exist in other firms but you don’t get calls from managing partners inquiring about it - note that not everyone gets these calls and this is not a routine but mostly when you have too many non-billables). Apart from the above, experience at the firm is shaped more by your immediate team than the firm as a whole, which is equally true for any other tier 1 law firm. In terms of overall culture:
** Positive ** - I’ve not seen a firm as non- hierarchical as Azb, flexible dress code (does not have any stupid rules).
**Negative ** - 10 am punch-in time, lack of trust in employees (non- existent wfh policy pre COVID, recent hasty decision to call people back to work amid COVID).

I advise my junior colleagues the following:

(a) Before you mindlessly start summarising, if required take, half a day to just go through the relevant documents. This would help you in getting a generic idea of what the documents are and any critical points. Also, would be helpful in knowing the impact of the transaction on such contract (if would require prior approval of counter party).

(b) once you have gone through the contracts, try to identify the similarities between the contracts. Especially, if they are company templates, you would be able to identify that probably certain commercial terms are different across the drafts. Identifying what are similar and what are dissimilar helps a long way in efficiently (if not quickly) summarising DDs.

(c) Refer back to point (a). Ask yourself why is this agreement necessary and why are you reviewing it. concentrate on the same, rather than entire document. No one reads it anyways.

(d) if it refers to any other document, always ensure, to ask for the copy of the same, unless it stands superseded by the document.

(e) Spend some time in going through other documents. You would realise the documents use standard template. So, if you are required to summarise Force Majeure clause, rather than summarising boiler plate clauses, you could concentrate on out of the ordinary circumstances (let's say, ability to call labour strike or non-availability of material in a manufacturing agreement would be highly unusual, compared to Act of God).

Okay first thing is that there is no “he’s nice at work but creepy outside work”. Some of these instances were literally the same call. He’s being creepy at work. This is workplace sexual harassment. And he’s giving you preferential treatment with the work so you will feel obligated to put up with it and not call him out. And he probably does this to every other intern. It’s his mode of operation.

I’m only 28 years old and I cannot imagine wanting to be friends with or dating a college going kid. I’d just feel grossed out. There is something wrong with him- he probably likes preying on younger women. An adult his age should not be interested in having any relationship with you outside of work.

The bad news is - this does happen. Especially when you’re a young unmarried woman around a lot of older male coworkers. And it’s hard to find the line between not being seen as unsociable and not being taken advantage of. Some of the things that have worked for me- just physically leaving the space when they start to get familiar- literally run away in the middle of a conversation if that’s what it takes, joking about it and saying “ oh god did you just seriously say that to an intern?”, or saying “ I’m not sure that’s work appropriate you know?”, and being the most boring human being on the earth when they start to get inappropriate. If these don’t work- you need to have a sit down chat with them where you tell them you need clearer boundaries if you are to have a collegial relationship.

Document everything that happens as much as possible. Even if the calls aren’t recorded- tell a friend what happened every time he misbehaved.

You are at the start of your career. You will meet many men like this and many better men . Do not feel beholden to this guy or anyone else. It’s not about ruining your career in its infancy. It’s about deciding that you wouldn’t want to continue working under such conditions with such people. And asking for better for yourself.

Cut off contact with him and look elsewhere. You will have better luck next time.

Its really sweet that a parent is here on LI trying to figure out how to help their kid.
Law school is an extremely fun place and I can't tell you how better of a person it has made me. Please listen to your kid, treat them like an adult, but be there by their side when they make a mistake. They are growing into their own selves and would have views radically different from yours, be open to that experience.

Based on from where your child was living, college could be a culture shock, so help them out with that. There are times when your kid would be under pressure, lend them your ears and be as supportive as possible.

If you care about your child to this extent to go out and ask such questions, I am sure you will be a great parent and will help your child out.

Good luck and thanks for putting such a heartwarming question.

1. Give your kid space - speak to them 2-3 times a week (max, not more).
2. Keep a strict budget for them - keeping in mind your lifestyle, and more importantly assessing the lifestyle of his/her peer group/fellow students (if you're affluent, but most of the kids/batchmates are not, then cut down on the budget. Don't fret, its for your own kid's benefit).
3. Be sure to review their academic progress (do it semester/trimester wise - don't sit on their heads about exams, projects etc. This is the time for them to become responsible, but don't "fire and forget". Be sure to keep an eye on their attendance/performance. My NLU used to send attendance updates monthly and transcripts at the end of the semester/trimester).
4. Don't let them come home too often. Once in the middle of the semester/trimester is enough, if at all.

I was in the same boat. Never lived away from home. Suddenly independent.

I loved it but everybody's experience may differ.

As far as performing well is concerned, I don't think you at a distance can do much about it. It depends on self discipline. Possibly you could keep on motivating him to do well. As far as a good life goes, some home snacks and routine video calls went a long way for me.

I do not know any background, but one thing I think will really help your kid (and kids in general) flourish is taking the pressure off them. No matter how useless clat is, it is still a stressful exam, with a stressful period of preparation. People are constantly in a rat race comparing scores with each other. Things tend to continue at university.

Yes, grades matter, but it is not the be all and end all. There are a multitude of opportunities in and away from the law based on skill. So if possible, please make him realise that, I hope I'd realised this earlier. I wouldn't have taken so much stress in the final two years before placements (although that stress did improve my rank).

In all probability (based on statistics I've observed), he will drink (maybe smoke/smoke up too). Could help to make him try these substances in your presence, so that the curiousity angle is taken away, and he isn't left vulnerable among a bunch of strangers.
The first time I tried any of this, I was in college among people I trusted, so even if I embarrassed myself, it was not a big deal.

One thing for him to remember - it's a 5 year game. Don't be too individual centred early in university, don't make enemies, and try new things. From sports to academics, whatever. The friendships and bonds made in university tend to last a lifetime, and are extremely helpful in the legal profession, from a professional perspective. Wishing the best.

I (F/21) interned (wfh) at a [unnamed] firm a few months ago. The [designated] partner I worked with called and once on the call, we spoke about work assigned, and then he ~switched to video~ and started asking personal harmless questions. He called again next day, at midnight to discuss work, and then proceeded to switch to video and discuss more personal stuff (I tried changing the topic back to work, failed). By then it had formed a pattern and it was too late for me to get out of it, considering he was the partner. I didn’t feel like pissing a partner off in the infancy of my career.

I purposely missed a few calls after that but was very much confused as they could have been about work too. But one of them was a house tour, him talking about my hair, and how “the most sensual thing about a woman is her neck”. He spoke to me a little about his past relationships, and his own life. Switched to the back camera and showed me something that was “written on his shorts”. Said he considered me a “friend”. And more such creepy bs. I think he once said something about an erection (not his). I don’t have any record of anything because he was clever enough to call and subsequently switch to video call.

Anyway, at this point I was too uncomfortable and was glad my internship period was coming to an end. I kept quiet about this even though it was borderline creepy, but I thought the wise thing to do would be to shut up and pray I don’t have to communicate or be diplomatic anymore. But it didn’t stop, he frequently texted to call him and I’d say I would but I never did. Because why? Internship over.

A few days later he proceeded to make a borderline creepy comment on my profile picture. He’s otherwise nice and helpful when at work (not to be construed as apologia, or justification). But horribly creepy outside work.

I cannot pinpoint the creepy, and I’d say it’s pretty unusual for partners to talk this much to their interns. I don’t believe in the whole call out culture on linkedin, definitely not willing to give this story a face. Is this sort of thing very rampant? I am actually terrified of working with a male senior alone now.

I have heard that many of you here have studied in Residential law schools (NLU's) after taking clat exams. What should a prospective parent know when thier kids are there. Once college reopens kids will be almost half a decade away from home. He hasn't stayed a single day away from us. His coaching center has said he will love it there in law school.

How can we ensure that our boy performs well and has a good life there?

I had secured an internship with Trilegal by simply filling up the form (back in March). But afaik, they have been providing internships only via contacts/internship cell these days (my uni had received a mail and lot of students were interviewed last month). Firms like CAM, Indus, S&R, Touchstone and DSK have a portal to fill in all details and tbh I don't think any of them works. I had to send out emails to HR before they actually replied. (They rejected me, of course).

NDA has a really good application portal. They usually reply in about 3 weeks time. Once you submit the form, you get an ID number with which you can contact their HR if they don't reply in the given time, and you'll have a technical interview if you get selected. Personally, I felt the interview was quite easy and they usually send a confirmation 3-4 days post the interview.

JSA sends out a HigherKnowledge link and asks you to complete at least 5 assignments. But they usually don't reply after you complete them (yes, quite annoying).

Luthra, Khaitan and AZB seenzones me every single time and sends a rejection after I follow-up with 3-4 emails.

I honestly have no clues about SAM. They don't even have a page for internships on their website so I guess they provide only via internship cell and contacts.

Hope this helps and all the best.

TDS will be the same, regardless of whether or not you are earning more than 50 lakhs. The difference will be at the end of the year when you have to pay your taxes or get a refund. Someone earning 49,99,999 would be liable for about 5.5 lakhs in tax (assuming presumptive tax, with no deductions), and someone earning 50,00,001 would be liable for more than 13 lakhs (assuming no deductions).

That might seem like a huge difference, but practically, most people deduct 1.5L for presumptive tax (which barely saves ~25k). If you are smart about it, that 13 lakh number can drop quite a bit. If you are earning that much, you will have a CA who will help you as well.

I 100% agree with you - the amount of training and effort that goes into (and by) more junior associates is simply incomparable. We regularly see junior associates take up assignments that would otherwise be taken up by only SAs/PAs outside the firm. Though, the reason behind this seems rooted more in the absence of a healthy roster of mid-level associates rather than an inclination for partners to directly train associates. While the latter instinct is definitely available in abundance, there is just an obvious function of efficiency that the partners would delegate to the more senior associates if they had any. On that absence, everyone from the Day Zero prepping kid and a PA somewhere, has heard rumblings that something wrong is going on at AZB.

If I had to identify this, it would be that the culture looks outward to its associates and resources - it seems any actions that are taken that may even seem to benefit associates are taken incredibly begrudgingly. Case in point, the office reopening debacle. While the covid numbers did not look promising at all, and WFH seeming like an absolute success (many groups billed more than they had in the previous year), there was a sudden call to start returning to the metros where the offices are. Recent joinees rented places and paid lock-ins, and moved houses only to realize that the office will not open at all and got stuck in lock-downs in strange cities. There was an open house scheduled for this reopening which included exactly 0 arguments/statements in the favour of continuing WFH. There was supposedly an anonymous question portal - which was either not used by anyone in fear of retribution or moderated by the HR team which instead raised completely tone deaf queries such as 'What does XYZ think of the recently concluded American elections?'.

When the firm realized that other law firms were offering a COVID leave - a policy was hastily put together which provided for 7 (sEvEN) days of covid leaves if you or a household member is diagnosed. Even the most notorious WhatsApp forwards are now aware that the recovery period for the rona is at least 14 days. Such actions seemed to be approved so that a placeholder counter exists to any complaints that may arise from inside or outside the firm about basic compassion that can be shown to a 'resource'.

The recent increments have been amply covered elsewhere on this publication and it seems many many resources are now contemplating exits. No one is surprised because very shockingly, at such a successful firm doing so many incredible things, there are very very few things in place to build loyalty. Unfortunately, the money does not do the job alone.

As an alumnus, who has since worked at 3 different firms since, I can tell you that place is toxic AF. Mostly because of the tight-fisted control with which the mothership runs the enterprise. Partners aren't given free reign and mostly resent her. BUT, here's the good news for someone joining:

1. I've never worked at a place that is as truly non-hierarchical. On my first day, a partner told me come with me for a smoke and then proceeded to bitch out Mummyji to me, a first year. In the words of Michael Scott, sometimes what brings the kids together is hating the lunch lady.

2. It's the best training ground there is - mostly because you do so much at such a junior level and are constantly stressed. The 10,000 hours of practice rule to perfection doesn't have a better ground to be tested (because you'll hit those 10K hours much sooner than your peers at other firms). Does it suck? Yes. Does it make you a better lawyer for it? Also yes.

3. It's a great springing board. From my intake back in the day, there were only 10 people who joined the Bombay office. Of those 10, 7 got LLMs at the best universities and jobs outside the country. Not saying that's the path for everyone, but if you can stomach it for a few years, you can have a myriad of opportunities waiting for you.

Good luck. A senior partner told me when I quit, congratulations on getting out of the quick sand before you got sunk in. Make sure you don't let the quick sand sink you in.

The situation is actually much more complicated and nuanced than it seems.

The fact that the Taliban was able to run through the country over a few weeks was because the Taliban actually has a large and legitimate following in Afghanistan, especially amongst the rural and the poor.

Hence Taliban is actually not a foreign force but an ideology to which a large part of Afghanistan subscribes to.

Additionally, it is in the bigger cities and the middle class/upper middle class who have always been the target of the Taliban and who gained the most over the past two decades.

These are the same people who are trying to flee because the retribution by Taliban would be directed against them.

For the rural and poor, Ashraf Gani and his corruption made their lives as miserable as they would be under the Taliban rule.

About America, well the less said the better. They just don't have the stomach or the fight to be the pre-eminent power in the world and now the secret is out there for everyone to see.

About the world, well it's always been hypocritical. We have molly coddled the Saudi's for years, even though the Taliban are nothing more than a cruder form of the Al-Saud form of governance and justice.

The only thing is that the Saudi's are rich and hence we kept our mouths shut and the Taliban are poor so we cry foul.

What would be interesting is to see how India reacts. Will we claim our high horse moral stand or actually work with the cards that are dealt to us.

An Afghanistan/Pakistan/China nexus is absolutely catastrophic for us.

I personally think mooting really helps, not necessarily from a CV perspective, but from the perspective of building you up as a lawyer. I did Vis a few years ago, and it has been one of the best experiences I've ever had. The process teaches you articulation, communication, teamwork, research, drafting and a lot more. The people you get to meet from all across the globe is also an amazing experience, and changes you as a person.

However, it is also a huge time investment. If you can't get a moot like Jessup/Vis/Man Lachs/ELSA, you could pick up those skills from other activities. For example, you can build speaking skills through ADR and Debate, and research skills through writing articles/papers.

Foreign firms and universities do recognise moots like Jessup and Vis, but if you have enough on your CV otherwise, it doesn't make a difference.

To prioritise, you could maybe do a moot one year, and a research paper the next?

My first 6 months were 100% overwhelming and confusing, and I considered leaving the team / practice area (capital markets) and firm every week. I ended up staying for 2 years and in retrospect I'm glad I didn't leave within the first year. The transition from student to professional doesn't happen overnight and taking my time to adjust to the new role allowed me to separate the quirks / aspects of the team and its work from the parts of the job that are just a part of the industry. It enabled me to take a decision when I was in a position to make a far more informed decision. I'd recommend taking the time to adjust and being certain of your decision and next steps at every stage.

Bro,
This is the truth, unfortunately. I am a GLC students and the less I speak about the manner in which placements happened and people with far less CV's got through and people who even fumbled with basic law questions got through. It is not in our hands.
Make sure you have drafted your CV well, have a look at the nujs format, because HRs don't see the content as they lack the brains, but they see the structure of the CV more. Also, try cold emailing people, atleast someone will reply. Also, those of your friends getting in through are getting through contacts, so forget about them, it will only stress you if you try to ponder on it. Also, make sure your basics are well done. Read contract, topa, company law properly and arb cpc (if disputes is your thing).
Try and write decent articles and publish them at reputed journals. Talk to people on linkedin. If you fail to get tier 1, try tier 2-3 internships, try Vaish Law , they will reply surely or firms like Bharucha, Samvad, Dhir and Dhir, etc. Don't lose hope, you will get what is your worth.

+1
Build a rapport with the A0/A1. Tell them that you are looking to get absorbed in the team. Also request you them to get you in touch with an SA / PA in the firm who can guide you properly.

Alternatively, you can also write to the PA/SA - request for a 5 min phone fall. In your email / msg, mention it clearly that it is your second internship. When you get the chance to talk to them, tell them that you are looking for a job.

Keep in mind to not to write to an SA/ PA who has recently joined as s/he would still be trying to get adjusted.

I've been following this discussion with a fair bit of amusement (& eventual consternation).. While I am not entirely sure if the mudslinging is nearing the end, I think it would be useful to try and redefine this conversation into one that at least brings some meaningful outcomes to lawyers, i-bankers and of course the clients involved.

The question should be, what would it take for investment bankers and lawyers to better understand one another such that they bring value to their work / role, which in turn flows back to the client(s) and the outcome of the deal? I'm gonna put down a few things that in my experience as a lawyer, require fixing from both lawyers and investment bankers.

In my practice as a lawyer, I see that the most common problems that lawyers create (I'm just being candid here) are the following:

1. failing to appreciate the work / effort that has gone into the deal, prior to the involvement of the lawyers. Most lawyers, in my observation show little or no understanding (let alone empathy) for the fact that the client, the bankers (& the tax advisors) would have spent several months (sometimes years) in trying to thrash out a commercial understanding with the counter party. The presumption that most legal teams walk in with is that everyone on the table is a greenhorn to the current deal, when in reality a lot of effort would have gone into even bringing the deal up to the stage where lawyer involvement becomes necessary. Of course there are good arguments to change this arrangement where lawyer involvement comes in earlier but lets touch on that later;

2. poor staffing on deals. This is of course partly (or largely) due to the very strangely budgeted lawyer fees that are allocated in a deal process. But the simple fact is that after a mandate is 'won' by a firm, inevitably the implementation (i.e. doing the DD and documentation) is left to a legal team which is led by a person who often don't have enough experience to handle such a matter. When I say experience, I mean that the senior-most person from the legal team who is on each call / meeting should have at least 8-10 years of experience (nothing less!). In an ideal world, the Partner or the PA (each carrying a track record of 8-10 years of experience) should be on each call such that there is at least some effort made in working towards closure (& issues can be resolved quicker, assuming of course the Partner / PA isn't a complete idiot!). The reason I harp on experience is because when you are on a vortex of z(d)oom calls trying to work out a deal, an experienced lawyer (or any professional for that matter) at least demonstrates a certain credibility and seriousness on the part of the firm and that side to try and resolve the matter and brings in some maturity to the trajectory of the conversation. In my experience of working with i-bankers (& I've worked with nearly all the big names), most of them always ensure that the main contact person: (i) has relevant experience of several years in the space; (ii) is constantly accessible throughout the process; and (iii) has the 'people' skill to manage all kinds of 'hairy' situations. The other allied problem of inexperienced lawyers on the deal is that we end up wasting time dealing with what are frankly timepass issues. A senior enough team will make the effort of at least pointing out the problems that can stop the deal or create a budgetary mess, instead of wasting large group discussion times on explaining the implications of under-stamped non-disclosure agreements whose term lapsed in 2017.

3. strange expectations of timelines. When you, as a lawyer, walk into a deal that's running under an i-banking process (whether as a Partner or as a first year associate), you should know that there is a timer that's immediately gone off the minute that your firm got mandated (even if your involvement came in much later - yes it is harsh, but that's life). Deals that are run through an i-banking process are ALWAYS aggressive on deadlines. I've never had a single i-banker come to me and say "Take all the time you want"; its always, "everything is due as of yesterday". That reality has not changed in years and it's unlikely to change in the future. If you get staffed on a deal which is being run under an i-banking process, you have to expect to be bombarded with deadlines.

Now, lets move on to things that I think i-bankers have gotten wrong, in the times I've worked with them:

1. Zero ability to prevail on the counterparty. If you ask me, the Dharma of an i-banker is to be an aggressive shark; whether it's through in your face combativeness or through consistent nagging and followups, an i-banker has to manage the deal effectively and keep pushing everyone towards closure (especially if there are no 'serious' issues or gaps in the commercial deal). I've met quite a few bankers who are useless at being able to prevail on the other side and push hard on their client's positions. Incidentally I did a deal with Avendus last year and they were brilliant at chopping / crushing / pummelling down the other side into a big sobbing mess (which worked brilliantly for my clients). Frankly that was very much the need of the hour in that deal and Avendus did exactly what was expected of a professional banker (i.e. push our point across, hard!). But I've seen several i-bankers who are a meandering mess when it comes to pushing a point across.

2. Inability to set a negotiating tone. If it is the i-banker(s) that has/have created the deal, brought the parties together and engaged the tax and legal advisors, it is important for the i-bankers to keep / preserve / maintain a negotiating tone throughout the process. I've seen this enough and more times to know that when an i-banker goes from being all out class monitor from chasing on documents, fixing calls, hounding for xyz, to suddenly going quiet, something has gone awfully wrong. Sometimes there may be reasons for the change but what a lot of i-bankers fail to understand is that if you suddenly change the pace of your functioning from fast to unresponsive, that's bound to kill a deal a lot quicker than you can imagine. It may seem like a rookie mistake but it has happened with a lot of very senior guys I've dealt with in the past.

3. No rapport with the counterparty. This is closely linked to 1 above (for i-bankers). To me a good i-banker should be pally, if not chaddi buddies with the counterparty (or if nothing else, the counterparty's worst nightmare - see point 1 above) and be able to push through otherwise tough positions and reach agreements on sticky issues, purely through a personal rapport that they build (remember that long process they run before the lawyers come in? WTF was happening then, I tell you!). A lot of i-bankers I have dealt with, despite their intelligence and IIM / ISB / Ivy-league MBAs are a disaster when it comes to trying to persuade the counterparty on a sticky issue, purely due to their inability to communicate or convey a POV meaningfully. A personal rapport, a connect, or at least a carefully positioned stance can do wonders at times like these - this is something that I've seen go wrong multiple times.

I am sure people can think of other problems as well for both sides, but enough of the chiding. The 'solutions' to what I mentioned above are, I'd imagine, not hard to appreciate and don't need to be laboured on.

To conclude, to anyone and everyone who thinks that lawyers or i-bankers are replaceable or worse, dispensable on a deal because of the challenges in working with one another, I would say you are hopelessly wrong. I would also say that you clearly have not experienced enough in life where you fail to understand the crucial importance of professional relationships, equations, friendships in creating a stake for yourself in the M&A/PE advisory space. Personal rapports are everything, especially for lawyers and investment bankers. And if you want to succeed, this mudslinging will do you no good, whether you are a lawyer or a banker.

The section states as follows:

"[...] an assessee [...] engaged in a profession [...] and whose total gross receipts do not exceed fifty lakh rupees in a previous year, a sum equal to fifty per cent of the total gross receipts of the assessee in the previous year on account of such professionor, as the case may be, a sum higher than the aforesaid sum claimed to have been earned by the assessee, shall be deemed to be the profits and gains of such profession chargeable to tax under the head "Profits and gains of business or profession."

My reading is that the section doesn't say a person can declare, at their discretion and without reference to facts, a lower income. Whether you have a higher income or not has to be premised on facts - the only benefit 44ADA provides is that the IT Dept cannot require you to provide evidence for your expenses if you have claimed less than 50% as expenses.

So, if you take the same example that I had first given. If I say my income is 12.5L (so, I claim expenses of 50% of my gross receipt of 25L) and I invest 15L in mutual funds in that year. Can I assert that my income was in fact 12.5L, when clearly, I have more than 15L saved from my gross receipt of 25L? I don't think so.

So, IMO the tutorial doesn't follow the section. I did find this instruction to file ITR 3 - see Page 13/152 (or search for 44ADA a few times) and it states:

"The presumptive income from the professional activity should be reported at column 62(ii), which is required to be computed @50% of gross receipts. In case you have actually earned income at the rates higher than the specified percentage of gross receipts (i.e. 50%), please note that you have to declare income at such higher rate."

Since this is a relatively new section, it will be interesting when the first case reaches the ITAT level. I had checked for 44ADA cases some time ago and couldn't find any relevant decisions. Those who practice tax, do let me know if you've come across any case law on this issue.

I am not into law firms right now but I recently read few threads here which were upsetting. Most of them are from people who have just entered the industry and are being bulled over. Hopefully, reading my experiences will help.

I am a non-NLUite from a middle-class family with no social capital to leverage when I entered the field. I am sharing some experiences that you may find relevant:-

1) Getting First Job - I interned at this law firm in my final year (not Big6 but a decent paymaster overall). I worked with some of the nicest people and one of the team members even agreed to recommend my candidature for the job.

I had an hour-long interview. Post-interview, I was asked to do another internship at their another office before they could commit. This was my final year and I declined their offer on the call itself. I told them that I had other job offers and I had no intention of leaving those for an internship. I was asked what these other job offers were (I had no other offer at that time) to which I replied that clearly, this firm was better than any existing offer I had, as otherwise, we wouldn't be having this conversation.

Eventually, they agreed to prepone the so-called internship so I can join them in the month of May itself, converted the position of a Paralegal which implied I would be paid a living wage (slightly less than half of an associates' salary) and renegotiated the decision period from 6 months to 1 month. Once I joined them at this new office, (team members were different here) I discharged all the functions of an A0, with the distinction that I wasn't a law graduate yet. Anyways, at the end of the month, they told me that they needed to extend the observation period to which I politely said no. Some of the folks working at the firm were upset and saw this as ego talking. My personal take was that a promise was made and it didn't seem fair that I was asked to do the job at half the pay for no reason. Anyways, I was told that were unsure and could not extend me an offer.

Not all was lost. On the last day, I pitched something I was working on for some time to the managing partner, and while I did not get the account, it gave me a lot of confidence. Also, The stint at the firm helped me get a very good stint at litigation (I was getting almost 4x of what an average fresher lawyer was being paid, though overall I was still underpaid by the law firm standards).

2) Doing Pro Bono Work - Doing pro bono is nice if you are doing it for the needy. I was doing free work for major organizations in the hope that I will get some work later on but zilch turned up. I started saying no and instead of doing the job for free would say something similar "in order to build trust and have a long term relationship, I would be happy to do it at half/one-third of what I charge". This helped me a lot more than what I was doing earlier.

3) Negotiating with Large Client - After following up for more than a year (yes, you read that right, it was about 14 months), I eventually landed a very large client. They liked my work and I was in but consideration for my services was yet to be settled. To close the deal, I gave them a very generous discount (Instant regrets post-closing). They had the volume but margins weren't there. After working with them for 2 years, I eventually told them that I cannot continue to work at the discounted rate and the price will need to be hiked substantially. They of course said no to that. So, work stopped coming in and I had doubts if I had made a mistake. Anyways, 5 months later and (trying it out with few other folks I imagine), they came back and offered to pay what I had initially asked for.

4) Taking Down Bullies - It was my early days with this one major client, and this one person was giving me hard time for no reason. In the larger scheme of things, I was the master of my own destiny, and this guy was not even management but because he was the client I took it. Eventually, I was about to lose my cool one day and decided enough was enough. I reached out to the decision-maker i.e. who was my initial contact at the organization and asked him for a quick call. I requested that I would like him to change my contact person at the firm. He asked the reason, I did not say anything adverse other than that I don't think we will get along. The person told me if perhaps I would be generous enough to give one more chance to the guy. I don't know what happened internally but I never faced any issues over there again.

Yes, I can also write about 10x of more incidents where things didn't go my way but such is life, the point is you need to stand for yourself and be confident in your abilities. Law firms or any other organization is not a charity, they pay you that much because they extract work of atleast 3-4x value. Also, no matter how much they try to convince you are replaceable and 100 are sitting outside to replace you, don't fall for that. If it was so easy to replace people, headhunters would have died out by now. Remember a law firm's core assets are its people, and if they think they can get any idiot to do your job, then what exactly is their strength. Be firm, be assertive and always stand up for yourself.

Self-assess yourself, and see if you are up for the task, if you are, don't take any sh*t from anyone. If you are not, I would recommend that you work on yourself and if the place is toxic still, consider changing jobs. Self improvisation requires you to be at peace, if you are constantly stressed out, the last thing you will be able to do is exceed expectations.

Clearly, your idea of "cancel culture" is law school students refusing to engage with a bunch of bigoted supporters of fascism. What an absolute joke. Conservatism (unfortunately) is a fairly dominant opinion and is in no way oppressed or suppressed in the mainstream, and certainly doesn't need an additional space in law schools, which are better off providing a space for counter narratives to grow and for others to have a voice.

Hi,

From my experience starting out, a few suggestions for your consideration:

1. Think about whether you can afford to scale up the office expenses a bit more - if you can get to the 40k range. It will help. I started in a 14k office in Perin Nariman Street (towards the CST end) and I moved in six months to a 30k one. I started in attorney practice and realised that once I got a decent client I could not really have them come to the broken down building... From your post, it seems you are starting as an attorney/on-record rather than as counsel (if counsel, then you also want an office somewhere where attorneys will not find it all too inconvenient to brief you at the last minute...). Another option for you is (if you have a budget around 25-30k) is to go for a business centre. There are plenty in Fort. One counsel I know started out with a cubbyhole for 18k and now has two rooms in the business centre. Some law firms have started their Mumbai offices in business centres (before moving to larger spaces). If you have a team of 2-5, it can be very convenient. Justice Srikrishna was (at least pre-pandemic) running his very extensive arbitrator practice from a business centre premises. Very convenient. More expensive that the pure rentals, of course: but it is something where clients can come, there is a decent reception, electricity and cleaning is paid for etc... Also, your refundable deposit amount will be 3 months (and not 6 months) so less one-time.

2. Do you absolutely need a junior? If it is just for getting dates when you are stuck or something, or doing basic first drafts in some matters, you might instead simply brief junior counsel on matter to matter basis. The absolute juniors in counsel practice charge really low. And if you brief them in their first year, when five years later they get clients approaching them, they won't forget that you assisted them when noone else did and refer chaps to you...

3. Why 5 desktops?? Two laptops (or one laptop + one desktop) is more than enough. One for your own work use; one for general office use (to be shared by the rest of the office).

4. You do not need a peon and a court clerk. You can engage court clerks on a matter-to-matter basis (for 3-5k, they will handle filing, removal of objections etc), and that clerkage can be expensed to clients directly together with court fees.

5. Speak with one of the photocopiers nearby and get them to give you bulk discounts for routine printing - many will give you a bulk discount but also give you matter-wise bills: extremely helpful for expensing out. But buy a scanner nonetheless: way too expensive to scan outside. And have the peon operate the scanner and raise "bills" on you (for 50% of the outside scanning charges) so you can expense that out to the client (and recover your scanner investment).

Read 44ADA again and notice that it says such other "sum higher than the aforesaid sum claimed to have been earned by the assessee", then that will be the income of the assessee. So, if your expenses are INR 10 on gross receipt of INR 100 then your income will be the balance INR 90 (that is, such higher sum...). 44ADA does not deem you income to be INR 50 (ie 50% of the gross receipt - the section does not actually provide for this). See the linked ITR 3, that makes it even clearer. The way I've always read the word "presumptive" in "presumptive taxation" is that the law presumes your expenses (and not your income) and that you don't have to retain evidence of expenses.

While the original intention was in fact that 50% of the profits will be deemed to be the income of the assessee (see the union budget for 16-17), however, the drafting does not follow the budget speech and neither does the explanatory statement (see Para 38 of the linked explanatory statement), which only speaks of reducing compliance burden and then uses the same "50% or such higher sum" language.

As the stated intention in the explanatory note is to reduce compliance burden (and not tax burden). So, what 44ADA provides for is that professionals making less than 50L are exempted from keeping bundles of evidence and preparing a statement of accounts. The exception to this is when: (a) someone claims more than 50% of their gross receipt as expenses; and (b) when the gross receipt exceeds 50L; in which case the IT Dept wants you to get audited and retain the proof of your expenses.

Read Para 38 of the explanatory note to FA 2016: https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.incometaxindia.gov.in/Communications/Circular/Circular03_2017.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwjE2qXU_abyAhU38nMBHST0BE0QFnoECCEQAQ&usg=AOvVaw1yo4TqZqTtkO3iqeHHc3MK&cshid=1628616699762

Read ITR3 (search for 44ADA): https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.incometaxindia.gov.in/forms/income-tax%2520rules/2021/itr3_english.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwjC6ou9_6byAhWoxjgGHThwCCoQFnoECCMQAQ&usg=AOvVaw2mjkdv91kdWYpzyNX0Q_bz

First few years - you will be sharing an apartment with 2 of 3 of your friends.

Also does your society allow? What will you do when you visit home etc need to be accounted for.

Cats are easy to raise - less demanding and no society frowns on cats. Even your flatmates won't shout if you have a cat.

Dogs are 5 times more difficult to raise - they need to go for a walk, Food on time over attachment, regular bath and vet visits etc. Dogs maybe more loving and loyal - but raising it is not a cakewalk.
And even if you raise a dog - it will be a dashhund, beagle or some miniature ones; you won't be able to raise a GSD or Rottie in a small apartment. Especially when you are not in the house from morning to night.

Don't adopt without taking everything into consideration. Dogs get overly attached in 10 to 15 months, after that leaving the same is cruel - so think and decide.

I just got placed in a tier 1 law firm in Mumbai and I really want to adopt a dog/cat since I've never been allowed one when I was younger. I'd like to know if it is realistically possible with the space an apartment provides as well as the time I'd be able to give to them. Alternatively, if fostering is a possibility and if anyone else has pets I'd like to hear your thoughts on this. I'm inclined to believe that it's kind of unfair to the animal since I'll probably have long working hours, but I really want to make it work so let me know if anyone has an experience that could help me

If the Company takes a secured loan from a Bank, the Company will need to file CHG 1 giving out the details of secured asset.
If the Company issues secured debentures, the details of the secured asset needs to be filed in CHG- 9. (CHG-1 not required to ne filed in the case)
So anything related to secured asset in case of debentures goes only in CHG-9 be it registration of charge, modification of charge or even satisfaction of charge.

PAS-3 on the other hand is filed when a Company issues securities on private placement basis (i.e to a select few investors instead of general public). Securities would include share and debentures or any convertible instruments.

I'm not sure how much you understand, so I've dumbed it down for good measure.

The retainer (gross receipt) is like the revenue of a company and your "income" is revenue minus expenses. Income tax is only applicable on income - and not on your retainership / revenue / gross receipt. I don't want to sermonise on what expenses you should or should not claim but legitimate expenses related to working as a lawyer can and should be claimed (for example, taxi rides late in the night post work which aren't expensed to a client is a valid expense). House rent, OTOH, is not a valid expense (during non-COVID times) even though the vast majority of firm lawyers show that as an expense. This concept is set out in S. 44ADA. [Note: As an aside, please don't get confused like 99% lawyers and start thinking that 44ADA presumes that 50% of your gross receipt is deemed to be an expense and so you effectively only pay income tax on 50% of your gross receipt. This is a common misunderstanding which even some CAs entertain.]

Every month the firm will deduct 10% of the retainer. The 10% deduction is pursuant to S. 194J of the Income-tax Act, 1961.

S 211(1)(b) is an exception to the general rule which allows "professionals" to pay the entire amount of advance tax by 15 March (as opposed to throughout the year for all other people). So, you have to pay the total tax due to the department by 15 March after accounting for the TDS already deducted by your firm. This is the reason you firm shares Form 16s with you.

For now, the old regime of slabs and deductions will be more beneficial to you. Which means, after you've reduced the expenses from the gross receipt, what is left is your income. For the first 10L, you will pay 1.25L and thereafter 30%. From this income, you can make some deductions permitted under the IT Act. Under 80CC, you can make deductions upto 1.5L and there are some other deductions available. Google that shit.

Due to the TDS and the expenses that you can deduct (this is year deducting house rent, mobile bill, and home internet bill will be a legally valid expense IMO) from your gross receipt; this effectively means that in the first couple of years (if you're in a Tier 1 firm and maybe till year 3-4 year if you're not in a Tier 1 firm) you won't have to pay any advance tax since the TDS already deducted through the year would be more than the tax you are liable to pay after considering the expenses from your gross receipt and deductions from the income.

An example is below:

Assumption:

Gross receipt is 25L.
TDS rate 10%
Old tax slab (because I remember that better)
Expense is 5L.

So, income is 20L (25-5) and total TDS deducted till and including for March will be 2.5L (because the tds is deducted on your gross receipt).

Assuming you've made no deductions (ELSS, PF, etc.), the tax that you're liable to pay is 1.25 for the first 10L and 3L on the next 10L.

So, total tax due is 4.25L. Net amount payable after considering TDS already deducted is 1.75L (4.25-2.5).

So, by 15 March, you would have to pay 1.75L as advance tax. Of course in real life, all of this gets a little more complicated depending on when you get your bonus and income arising from FDs or STCG in debt mutual funds, etc. etc.

Why do people purchase hardbound journals in 2021? I'm convinced printing from database such as SCCOnline is quicker and cheaper than photocopying the same judgement. Researching online and reading commentaries also seems easier than researching through journal volumes.

What purpose do these law journal hardcopies serve? Is it for interior decoration? Do you get some tax incentives? Why do you do it?

Is the pay at a level fixed for all associates? I know overall pay taking into account the bonus might differ from person to person depending on their performance but is the base pay the same? So do all A2s in the firm have the same fixed base pay?

Also, if then a lateral joins at A2, they'll have the same base pay as other existing A2s right? I think you're conflating two different things. OP is referring to what I said above. What you're referring to is the pay disparity due to discounting of experience, which is a different matter. The person you're talking about - regardless of the fact that he joined with PQE of 4 years so should've been an SA - he joined as A2 so at least he must still be paid equal as other existing A2s right?

Long way to go before you don your robes. Thinking so far ahead is only going to cause anxiety. Try to stay in the present and focus on enjoying your time in college. Cultivate friendships, read lots, find good mentors.

As far as the nature of litigation goes, let me tell you that litigation reflects life. There are levels to litigation, but all courts exist as part of this world and are manned by people of this very world. All courts will thus mirror the world they are a part of.

The world is at times unscrupulous. People are unscrupulous or streetsmart or conniving or cruel. As a lawyer, you may be asked to work for them or work against them or with them. Develop an understanding of these aspects of human behavior. Empathy for the wicked or powerful as much as for the victims. It helps you forge varied professional relationships, or refine your approach to ease dispute.

You must try and understand that people have positive intentions for their actions, even if you judge those actions harshly. The streetsmart man may have to be so to survive in his ecosystem. The unscrupulous man may have been wronged and never met true justice. The criminal offender may have been abused as a young child.

What part of your observation of the world you allow to inherit as your personality is your job to filter. Good mentors will help you choose well if you choose your mentors well. There is room for the virtuous and also the wicked, both in litigation. Both can co-exist in a man; indeed both do in most of us. The wise lawyer knows he is not judge. The wise judge knows the lawyer is not a reflection of his case or client.

Enjoy your college years. Let this be your takeaway.

Deposit is a wider term than debenture, as any kind of receipt of money would be deposit, unless specifically excluded.

Debenture is a specific format of instrument and whilst it represents a debt, is different from loan.

Also, any company may issue debenture, but unless specific thresholds are met, a company cannot accept deposit.

To summarise, all debentures (unless excluded in terms of Acceptance of Deposit Rules, basis the subscriber (such as company) or nature of instrument (item (ix) and (ixa)) ) are deposit, but not all deposits are debentures.

Debentures can be raised through public offer or private placement.

Deposits can only be raised through members.
(And persons other than members if public company crosses a certain threshold prescribed.)

Further, certain debentures are convertible into equity shares but deposits cannot be converted into equity.

1) Rent and power are on lower side. Can't comment on salaries.
2) Many other expenses not considered- subscriptions to journals/ reporting services, refreshments, conveyances, internet/telephone, mail id's, repairs etc, various miscellaneous expenses,
3) Buy laptops instead of desktops. You can get decent ones in same range. And for litigation, you don't need very high specs, unless you have lot of heavy excel data files etc. Also, for four persons, why you need five systems, even after assuming your peon and court clerk are also given a system (unless the steno is on your payroll and needs a system).
4) You may want to see when to go for recruitment and don't start with this much team from day one, since it may not be completely needed in beginning, unless you've good deal of work from day one.

One suggestion - just visualize yourself in office (or better, go to an operating office and just look around), you'll realize all expenses. You'll also need some funds to meet initial payroll and other costs, since your cash flows won't be in sync with outflows plus as a start up, you'll have some lean months in beginning. Please consider keeping aside six months operating costs as a reserve, which will burn through and then cash flow mismatch will come up. Of course, this won't apply if you have a steady cash flow (not billing but actual cash receipt) from day one.

Lol, whatever.

Rawls is one of the most flawed philosophers and the idiocy of his construct has been suitably dealt with. Look, you can subscribe to whatever notions you want (it's a free world), but if you genuinely cannot acknowledge the validity and soundness of views that differ from your own (and that appears to be the case here), then, you have a much bigger problem than what you realize. That's okay - I'm not the one who is outraged and constantly resentful here (I'm not saying you necessarily are though the tone and substance of your exchanges so far would suggest that you have a chip on your shoulder - not something that I'm trying to say to be pejorative, but as a general observation).

I'm sure you're a nice person IRL - friendly piece of advise: in my experience at least, some of the most enriching experiences and character development that you can have, will arise from friendly interactions that you have with people who disagree with you entirely. It would be very good for any person to have the humility and maturity to recognize that our way isn't the only way.

Peace.

After talking to a few friends who struck out on their own and started their own Law Practice (litigation), I have a ballpark figure on the average one-time investment and monthly expenses involved in setting up shop -

Expenses

Books

Bare Acts – Rs. 3500
Commentaries – Rs. 15,000
(leatherbound volumes)

Stationery

Letterheads – Rs. 2,000
Envelopes – Rs. 2,500
Stamps/Seals & Inkpads – Rs. 500
Stationery (Printing paper/Ledger paper), Pens – Rs. 3,500

Computer hardware

Printer cum Copier – Rs. 9,000

Office Furniture & fixtures (chairs, desks, sofas, ACs, cabinets etc) – Rs. 59,000

Scanner – Rs. 5,000

Desktop PCs (Rs. 30,000 x5) - Rs. 150,000

OFFICE PREMISES

One time Security Deposit & Brokerage for rented office = Rs. 200,000/-
------------------------------------------------------------------------

TOTAL = Rs. 450,000/-

Monthly Outgoings

Rent (Bombay) - Rs. 22,000
Power - Rs. 2,000
1 Peon salary - Rs. 10,000
1 Court Clerk salary - Rs. 20,000
1 Junior Advocate salary - Rs. 20,000
Printer refills - Rs. 1,500
Stationery refills - Rs. 3,000
Postal Costs - Rs. 5,000 (for service, recoverable from client)
Steno/Typing fees - Rs. 9,000
--------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTAL = Rs. 92,500/-

This is what the first time outlay and monthly outlay of a small, modest Litigation practice in Mumbai looks like.

Just ask. Don't be ashamed. We all know that we are all looking for jobs. Just walk up to the partner and tell him about your position, your interests, and why you would like to work there and wait for him/her/them to answer. Don't just ask for a job. The correct way is to express and justify your interest. Also, inform the associates that you would like to work there and ask them for feedback. Chances are the partner does not even that you exist and naturally, they will consult the associates about your performance so it's wise to be in the good books of the associates and build relations with them.
At the end of the day, it is not only about skills. Get them to like you and present yourself properly- you will be hired.

I am from a top NLU and have interned at many firms. To share from my experience, I would honestly suggest you to talk to the founding partner or the partner who has a say in the firm.
Maybe mail the partner or if the partner allots you work directly (since it is a smaller firm), then talk to the partner directly.
Dont be shy. Worst case would be the status quo remaining, and the best case would be you get the job.
Seize the day. All the very best!

This is the breakdown of the placement stats of GNLU after Day Zero.
Be vary that this is excluding all the Banks, other firms, PSUs and companies that usually hire from GNLU and pay a very competitive salary (10-14 LPA). So the total number would be a lot bigger than this. This is just for the top firms.

1. CAM: 3 PPOs and 16 Offers
2. Khaitan: 4 PPOs and 6 Offers
3. Trilegal: 8 Offers
4. SAM: 7 Offers
5. Saraf and Partners: 4 Offers
6. L&L Partners: 3 Offers
7. IndusLaw: 1 PPO and 5 Offers
8. Argus: 3 Offers
9. S&R: 3 PPOs
10. TT&A: 3 PPOs

Total PPOs: 17
Total Day Zero Offers: 52

As for the batch size argument, a lot of students don't sit for placements because they are interested in Judiciary (Specifically in Rajasthan & Delhi), many prepare for UPSC and other exams (for MBA and various other govt posts) and many eventually join the family litigation setup or start out as first generation litigators. ( GNLU also offers a need based scholarship which provides students with monthly remuneration when you're starting out as an independent practitioner).

Also, one can legitimately thank the director for really focusing on the public perception and network of the university. He can be said to be a "contributory force" in this entire saga.

Thank you and have a nice day. See you in the Top 5 of the NIRF rankings.

See, it for yourself here. I have snipped an image of the email that we received from our Placement coordinator today morning. If you do not even believe this, ask any 2022 batch student at GNLU.

[img]https://drive.google.com/file/d/1rMhxTbJoC9Ia1tZqnfhloF0BjNZQgVAY/view?usp=sharing[/img]

See, it for yourself here. I have snipped an image of the email that we received from our Placement coordinator today morning. If you do not even believe this, ask any 2022 batch student at GNLU.

Hi boss,
good to know that you are in a better place mentally and are looking forward to learn. As long as you are willing to put in the work and are eager to learn, you should progress. If you are not obsessed with brand value, do intern with these non 'tier-1' firms and pick up a job. It is imprudent to intern with firms which hire through day 0 to get a job there now. However, in my 2021 batch, quite a few good candidates made it to AZB after they graduated (and interned in July). I think the chances of that are low while not zero.

At this point, try for firms located in Delhi-NCR and not Bombay. For lower paying firms Bombay is probably unaffordable and unless you have family money or are paid a lot, you should try for Delhi. Since everything is virtual, do as many internships as possible. It is however better to do fewer although longer internships than a string of 3 week internships.

You are behind your Batchmate's on the jobs front undoubtedly. But this does not mean that in a year or two you cannot find yourself in the same place. It is hard but very doable in my opinion.

The hardest part is getting rid of the mental block and the lack of confidence which might hit you on a daily basis. Keep trusting yourself and I hope soon you get a job you like. Since you are recovering (recently recovered) from mental health issues, ensure that you don't spiral into a bad place again. There are so many things which could push you there but you need to prioritise staying in good mental shape over most other things.

Good luck, I am rooting for you.

If you have any further questions, please post them here.

Graduate of a well-known law school here. I am using the term 'well-known' not describing how good or bad it was because the public perception is divided on that and I don't want anyone to taint their opinion on basis of that.
It was not amongst NLS, NUJS, and NALSAR so did not have a brand name strong enough to get doors open on just the basis of the brand name. I am not sure if this holds true for the top 3 too but anyways my law school for a fact doesn't have that kind of pull. So, here are some of the things I know for a fact work and you can make use of them:-

1) Find a connection - Yes, it is hard but a lot of times you are overthinking it. Start with your law school faculty, if you have a good repo with them, see if they can help you out. Some of their batchmates would be in law firms and they can easily help you out on that front. If they don't, think creatively. In my case, one of our tenants used to work at a Big4 and he wrote the email to the HR of the Big4's best friend law firm and that worked. Even he wasn't sure (he was not in a very high position) it will work but it worked. Make searches for connect on LinkedIn but don't make it the final stop. Time to reconnect with that Mausaji working at MNC or that uncle running the electronics store (he knows the procurement guy at these companies who could get you in). Think hard and see what can be done.

2) Show a Genuine Interest and do Cold Outreach - If money is the only factor due to which you want to join a law firm, that is fine but you need to come up with ways to show that you really want to be part of the law firm. Start writing your own blog on updates. Try to contribute to reputed places such as https://indiacorplaw.in . Start reading corp law updates on Mondaq, Vantage Asia, B&B, Law Firm Updates etc. and be active on Linkedin. Start adding Partners, PA etc on LinkedIn and sharing actively. You can see your post view stats by designation and once you feel that on a consistent basis your posts are read by a lot of law firm partners, start reaching out to your first connection partners asking for LinkedIn. By this point, there is a good chance they have read your material, and if you have done even a half-decent job, this substantially increases your chances of getting an offer.

3) Networking Opportunities - Subscribe to them and follow them on LinkedIn if they have a page. Be on the lookout for any webinar, or another form of network. Attend these events, ask intelligent questions and shamelessly ask for an internship. Yes, I know it is difficult to put you out there but that is what it is needed. There is almost a biblical guilt in turning down a law student so most would ask you to apply to HR. Do that but cc the partner in the thread and even though the email is addressed to HR, your audience is the partner. So speak about you had met and the partner had asked you to apply and so on. People appreciate persistence even if not all of them a lot many do. Also, use the various law firm rankings and find practice leaders and follow them on social media. These people tend to do more of such events so higher chances of interacting with them.

4) Dog with a Bone Approach - For some of my friends this has worked, they have gone to the place where they want to intern and waited for hours, and did this on repeat for a couple of days till someone with authority (not the HR) agreed to meet them and then landed an internship. This works better with Judges and Senior Advocates than law firms but then again your mileage may vary.

5) Apply to startup law firms - LI often reports (not all) but a lot of time law firm partners split up and set up their own shop. These places are much more receptive to interns and also you get some quality work too. Even though these setups do not qualify as tier I law firms, if you make a good impression, the partner would be happy to recommend you to a law firm.

6) Research - I know for a fact that at least one of the best IP law firms in India hire interns on a first come first serve basis. They might take interns through referrals and contacts but the point is they take a lot of interns who just want to intern there. Be on the lookout for such firms.

6) Exercise Caution - Don't trust your batchmates who tell you they got in any of the Big6/7/8 firms just by writing to HR. That never happens and that is a fact. They are not just telling you the truth. I have applied to these firms 18 months before and still, they turned me down, and I am doing great by every metric.

Take a deep breath and relax. Taking this much stress as an intern is unwarranted. Remember that you are more likely to make mistakes when you are stressed. There is absolutely no reason whatsoever to think that you are "doomed".

If you are not getting any work on your first day, it possibly means that they are letting you settle in. As for asking for more work, text your senior(s) and let them know if you are free. Showing initiative is a great thing. However, do not spam as well.

While, I can completely understand that you are anxious. keep in mind that this stress is nothing compared to when you are actually in the profession. Take this as a learning opportunity and actively recognize and manage stress and anxiety.

Kachwaha & Partners is an old school, boutique law firm. It is one of the few law firms which came into being after the epic JB Dadachanji & Co split (of the '90s). Kachwaha & Partners has had some outstanding litigation lawyers on its retainer. Meenakshi Arora (Sr Adv) and Ashok Sagar (Adv) - to name a few.

You could perhaps reach out to them for the advice!

Hi!
Guide to find a credible publicly available source for the NDI Rules.

Step 1: Avoid the following-
(a)Websites of:
(i) Department of Economic Affairs;
(ii) Ministry of Finance;
(iii) RBI; and
(b) India Code.

Step 2: Navigating through the e-Gazette-

Helpful link - .

Random articles indicate that the Rules were notified on 17th October, 2019. Go to . Click on "Search", and then "Search by Date". You'll notice that the subject is, very conveniently, not the name of the notification. Look for Ministry of Finance (S.No. 6). The subject of the file should be "In exercise of the powers conferred by clauses aa and ab of sub section 2 of section 46 of the Foreign Exchange Management Act". Click on the pdf icon.

Or, get yourself a subscription to SCC.

What a fun maze!

https://www.livemint.com/news/india/what-anand-mahindra-has-to-say-on-mahindra-university-s-school-of-law-launch-11627613462010.html

Dean is ex-NALSAR prof Acharyulu, was with Bennett before.

Kirkland is the highest grossing law firm by revenues at USD 4,155 million (Rs. 31,100 cr). PEP wise Wachtell is highest since it’s smaller at USD 7.5 million (Rs. 56 cr). But Kirkland and Davis Polk despite being big in size are at USD 6.2 million (Rs. 46.5 cr).

Total Indian law firm market is a mere USD 1,350 million (Rs. 10,000 cr). Of this Indian firms have about 65% share USD 880 million (Rs.6,600 cr).

CAM / SAM / AZB / KCO each have revenues around USD 106 million (Rs. 880 cr). This is a mere 2.5% of Kirkland’s revenues. I’m not going into the PEP for Indian firms because equity is shared rarely and shared generously even more rarely outside the family so the list of EPs is not a true reflection of their hard work, brand name and the business brought in.

Indian law firms are too small and insignificant in the global context. Even in Indian context, a sub 1000 cr revenue business is not huge. Market leaders of most industries such as TMT, BFSI, Real Estate are much bigger.

I was in a similar position a couple of years back and I decided to go with NUALS and I have no regrets so far. But for the sake of your question, I'll be as objective as I can.

Campus life - It's pretty great. The campus is quite small (unfortunately) but the college actually managed to provide all kinds of facilities - sports, co and extra-curricular activities, etc. There is an ardent footballing and quizzing culture in the college and you can find all the boys huddling around the mess TV on UCL nights and during other games. Every batch has around 65 students (the 2021 batch that just graduated had 120 though) and since the batch size is small, you pretty much know everyone. The seniors were very helpful when I was in my first year and overall, the people are generally great. There might a slight bit of ragging if the classes were offline (we call it 'positive interaction'), but the seniors who 'positively interact' with you would usually end up becoming close friends after the freshers.

Placement - It's similar to most mid-tier NLUs like RGNUL, RMNLU, HNLU, etc. We do not have day zeros and the firms/companies that usually come for placements aren't generally the ones that pay 14+ LPA like in other tier-1 NLUs (except for ICICI bank who usually come for placements and pay around 13LPA I think). The usual ones who come are banks like Axis, Federal, etc, law firms like LKS, Wadia Ghandy, and consulting groups like EY. But every year there will be around 8-12 people who get PPOs from t1 firms. So I guess, it all comes down to how hard you work.

People - Owing to the domicile reservation, half of your class (or more) might be people from Kerala. They are generally a great bunch of guys and honestly, language has never been a problem for me. I have learnt a bit of Malayalam and they have learnt a bit of my mother tongue and there isn't any kind of hostility (open or subtle) towards non-Kerala people as far as I have seen.

Also, Kochi city is about 10-15 min from the college and the college curfew is only at 11 pm. The mess food is decent as you get both north Indian and south India choice of food every day.

Overall, if you want an NLU tag I would recommend NUALS over Symbi. That said, my opinion might be slightly biased considering that I study here. I think Symbi has the advantage when it comes to location and a slightly better alumni base.

Anyway all the best for the next five years, whichever college you choose. At the end of the day, no college will provide anything on a gold platter and you'll have to work for it yourself.

Cheers :)

Just the breaking down the above pretentious law jargon for you:

"device complex structures" = tax bachane ke liye 4 alag companies incorporate kar diya

"developing market leading products" = mortgage ko bracket mein Collateralized Debt Obligation (CDO) bol diya

"test the boundaries of law" = the rules are confusing, case law nahi mila

"fin tech lawyer" = I understand neither finance nor technology par naya RBI circular aaya hai ispe

"cutting edge work" = client ne email mein 'blockchain' likha hai

Don’t weigh your potential with competitive exams. People whom we all know the most successful wouldn’t have cleared such competitive exams many a time . Please pursue a life you are passionate about with no comparison. Keep your dream alive and continue to learn to achieve it . Never succumb to external pressure or comparison . We are taught to fulfil others dream and it is too late when we realise we never lived for us . Take help from a well experienced counsellor to look at world in a bigger perspective. Take care & Thanks

OP here.
I started this conversation because I have been through same exact thoughts.

Kian posted the links to helpline because that's the right thing to do. While I hope you use it, I do know that you might not. I personally wasn't able to.

The only thing that helped me is just sticking around for some more time.
By the end of first year, all nightmares stopped.
Same thing happened with most of my batchmates. Seniors too.

It takes time, but it surely does get better.

I hope you stay. Like all of us did.

Hi my dudes - a couple of clarifications.

a. Tier 1 law firm associates don't make a lot compared to even other intermediaries on any given deal team. The dudes that are screaming entitlement really have no idea what the current pay scale regime is for our kinda qualified work. Even with the consultants tax breaks we make nothing for what our contemporaries make on a global scale (adjusted for currency/ buying power and the works). While yes, we are not splitting an atoms or doing any cutting edge work(loved it when partners coming in for day zero use to talk about firm life as something out of a gatsby novel + blade runner), we are doing a lot of work with a lot of hours and with heavy qualification built over years of doing something. Market forces on a global level already show that our salary structures have us pegged at the far back end.

b. I have been screaming unionisation (or association for that one cockroach who somehow thinks lawyers can't unionise) for years. Since the 3rd day of working at a firm. People are running around scared shitless at firms, no one has any sense of timelines, natural expectations to deliver on ungodly hours to bankers who by the way usually have zero value add on the transaction/ documentation aspect of things. to all naysayers - historically every group that dreamed of unionising had jerks off like you cream entitlement and the works. History is going to forget you as fast as i can type up this post.

c. Also lets not even talk about demand and supply here - its nauseating to see lawyers do so. Its just sad how sorry your analysis of market forces are that you somehow think dictates pay structure of corporate lawyers in India.

d. some guy said that the number of people willing to work for the same salary in 2015 is the same as 2021 - i am sorry but have you noticed the sheer scale movement in quality talent that you are retaining. My team at SAM has hired 11 A0s when all we need is 3 good A3s or A4s. There is absolutely no supply of quality. Yes enough A0s out there for a mediocre orgy - but nothing to relieve the deal teams of workload pressure . (no pun intended)

e. Also the sad part is that people who scream of entitlement or hatred for people who want to speak out are simply scared. I know 2 SAs in my team just like this and they have no idea of what to do outside of this system. This system that wants you checking your phone from 7Am in the morning and responding to emails till its 1AM. Dont pay any attention to these people. I think they need to throw away that token ayan rand book and go out on a 2 week holiday to some nice village on the hills and calm down. Sorry - these people never take holidays cause they are scared to piss of their own incompetent senior who thinks holidays are for the entitled.

Hey man, I get how you feel, I'm in the same boat, but what's done is done. You are not defined by one single Clat rank. Neither am I, or the other thousands of us who didn't make it. Doesn't stop us from being the best lawyers we can possibly be. Yeah, a great NLU helps us go a long way, but it isn't the only way. Please, please don't hurt yourself for something that will not even matter in a couple of weeks or months at most. Give yourself time to grieve it, don't blame yourself. If you think you could have worked harder, promise yourself that the next time you put your mind to something, you'll work your hardest. You have a long life ahead you, and a 149-mark paper is not the decider of that. For all we know, us, the "average" dropouts, just might make it big. The underdogs always win. For now, just take it easy, calm down and rest your mind. Look at your other options and chart out the plan, no college however great, should impede you from living your best life. Salud! Also, please talk to a professional, these are my 2 cents, but you'll want to vent, as you should, and no, you are not doomed, you're only just starting out, so talk to someone who can help you through this, and work on feeling better. Life moves fast, especially when you're young, and we either move on, and stay rooted, your choice. All the best!

I too failed CLAT at once, but today I’m a sought after lawyer for the practice I do.

Just because someone failed CLAT, does not mean it the end of the world. In fact is just the beginning of a slightly unusual and exiting journey to success. What is important during the process is not to let thinking fail. If the end goal is to become successful, that is who you should focus on becoming, and not get demotivated, simply because you are going to have a slow start. (Which frankly is also not a case anymore. Lines between NLU and Non-NLUs are very blurr these days).

You should know, slow start does not define your chances of victory, it is the planned and strategic finish that does. You should think of everyone who is rooting for you to be a successful lawyer one day, it does not matter which college you graduated from. Once in the uniform, they are all the same.

So cheer up and enjoy the rest of student life, these are days you would not want remember for being sad and disheartened.

Hey bud. Let me tell you something, I come from a lower middle class family. I was kicked out of my school due to a silly mistake I made in class 10th. I joined a coaching for IIT JEE and paid for two years only to quit within one monty (they didn’t give the money back). I didn’t have courage to ask my parents for money for a clat coaching so I literally sold my soul to buy material and mocks. But I prepared for two years and didn’t get a single NLU. Life was destroyed. Had nowhere to go, didn’t even have proper schooling. Parents were pissed and everything. Made a choice and joined a university and realised that these college brands are seriously a sham. I am doing very good and am extremely happy.

Given your rank you can get into a BHU, Jamia, AMU etc. Whatever you’ve learnt about these NLUs and Jindals, just unlearn it. My friend from AMU just got a ppo from CAM with no connections or support. You will just have to work harder. I realised that I could literally achieve anything from my local state university.

Let me tell you trick, if you join a BHU or a similar university. Just apply for tier 1 internships in months other than JUNE/JULY/JANUARY/DECEMBER, you’ll easily get an internship. You can do it because attendance won’t be an issue for you while it will be for others. Just prove your worth. Also no professor can teach you, what a book can. If you want to explore judiciary, you would have so much support because the entire batch goes for judiciary and a lot of alumni will guide you. If you want to do an LLM, you would probably be able to go because you would have saved so much money. I mean the fees is negligible. There’s no shortcut to gaining knowledge. But you can do it. I met this NLS kid in a tier 1 internship and absolutely destroyed him in terms of practical and theoretical knowledge and I am from a university which is nowhere in the top 20. No offence, but CLAT does not evaluate you or determine your your iq. It’s a crappy exam. Don’t think lowly of yourself. There is literally nothing that you can’t achieve hereon, the only given is that you must have the determination to do it. If you have the knowledge, you’re sorted. If you think, getting into a tier 1 law school means that you’ll get a tier 1 job without knowledge, NO! knowledge is important. It’s just that firms would come to recruit them while you’ll have to go to the firms to be recruited. That’s it. That’s the only drawback of being in a non tier 1 university.

I have learnt one thing in life. People can take away everything from you but not your knowledge. It’ll stay. Good luck dude, life is too important to give away like that. Let your mom be pissed. See they are not used to all of this, she’s concerned and doesn’t know how to react. Plus obviously they have a financial pressure. But ending life would only mean that all the money they spent on you is wasted. I am telling you a way where you’ll literally save money and you give back a lot. Don’t let these rankings and advertisements dictate your life. Tier 1s and university brands don’t mean anything, you’ll understand this 10 years later and thank this anonymous commentator on LI.

2015 was the last year when major pay hikes happened in the tier 1 law market due to Amarchand split. The lowest salary grade (A0) became 15L then.

Even accounting for an average inflation rate of 5% per year, the indexed salary should be 20.1L. That implies a pay hike of at least 33% across pay bands just to keep up with inflation.

Anyone who has prepared mandates in 2015 and right now would know that hike in hourly rates has been much greater (roughly from 8000 per hour to 12500 per hour approx as per law firms' own submission for journals rankings). That would be more than 55% increase between 2015 to 2021. Even assuming client pushback, it would be absolutely unreasonable to argue that law firms cannot afford to keep up with basic inflation.

The only real factor so far has been the disproportionate bargaining power. With attrition at an all time high, law firms are finding it very very difficult right to find associates at senior levels. While you may have 20 different law colleges lining up for an A0 job, anyone who has been a partner would know how rare a commodity SAs and PAs have become.

If I was at their stage right now - SA and above - I would use this opportunity to properly negotiate a major hike during interviews. Given my workload, I would gladly pay a 30% premium for an SA/PA if the candidate bargained for it.

Based on an honest experience as a Jindal Grad:

The answer depends on what your specific priorities are. However assuming the general set of expectations of a law aspirant: NUJS would be the safer option. (Of course do your research and verify everything being said by everyone here, these are all personal opinions and perspectives and may not be entirely true.)

The reasons are the following:

Job Security & Alumni Network: Jindal is a relatively young law school and despite the capital behind it, it’s gonna be a while before it can be at par and deliver as consistently as the top 4-5 NLUs. Most Jindal graduates are still young and are yet to make partner in law firms or make it big in the field of litigation, that is not to say that it will not happen, however you may have graduated by the time Jindal has cemented its reputation. At the moment whether in Litigation or corporate NUJS would probably give you a higher guarantee of securing a Job. Despite recent problems with its administration its placements don’t seem to suffer much. The numbers may indicate a high number of people in jindal securing jobs with top firms however the ratio of people placed to the total number of people in the batch is poor. Furthermore, the people that do get placed may include people that have secured the same through reference or through PPOs they got through internships all on their own. A great chunk of people that get placed at Jindal i.e. the top 1% of the batch are truly gifted and motivated people with near perfect GPAs and impressive extra curricular achievements, the kind of people that would get placed regardless of which college they’re from. So if you’re a mere mortal, above average but not topper kinda kid you may have a higher chance of securing a good starting Job at NUJS.

Internships: You will find it easier to secure internships as an NUJS student than a JGLS one.
The placement cell at Jindal becomes more active during placement season however you may struggle in finding internships through college. The internships are there but like I said only the ones with the highest GPAs get access and a good chunk of people end up without internship support. I don’t know the internal workings of internships at NUJS however from seeing plenty of NUJS people at internships, it’s fair to assume that their cell is fairly active. Furthermore, the current reality is that if you’re applying independently you have a higher chance of securing an internship as an NUJS kid than a Jindal one.

3. College Life: Entirely subjective of course. You will see brilliant dedicated individuals who would not swap jindal for anything because of their experience. However, it is important to note that the University is quite isolated and if you don’t like the college atmosphere then you might struggle as you may not have an outside world to go to. Delhi is a fair bit away and fairly expensive to get to. It also takes ages in commuting no matter what mode of transport you take. I believe NUJS gives you easier access to a metropolitan city. Plus you may find it relatively safer to come back to college in the middle of the night in Kolkata rather than Sonepat. The crowd in Jindal is a mixed one, you’ll find all kinds of people. The stereotype that only elite brats go here is a bit exaggerated, you’ll find a fair bit of people that don’t fall into that category. Honestly, anyone in the general category with access to a law course delivered in English is privileged by the standards of our developing country, so you’ll find a lot of people who are roughly on the same level of access to resources as NLU grads, but yes you will also see a great portion of the Jindal stereotype. I’m being vague here because I can’t throw percentages, but the point is that there are all kinds of people in Jindal but the hard part is that you may find it tedious to meet like minded people because the crowd is huge to go through.

The Upside of Jindal:

If you’re looking for a career in academia or are interested in LLM pathway courses, Jindal may give you a slight advantage over NUJS. There’s no denying the fact that the faculty in Jindal is top notch and having access to these professors would certainly help in getting into academia.

That’s it!
At the end of the day there is more than one way to get to your destination, so if you have a goal you’ll find a way to achieve it in either place. In case you don’t during college, it’s fine life is long just be resilient cuz that’s something you’ll definitely need for law xD.
Best of Luck!

I don’t want to discourage you but until you have a father here who is a senior or a partner, law will be very hard and unrewarding. Go to NYU but instead of a jd work for a few years in something like consulting and then see if you still want to do law. (This is very common in the us) places like Harvard and Yale law school(the best there) even encourage this and have a special deferred program. Law in India can be fun and may look glamorous but this is true only for those with a family of seniors, judges or partners in the corporate field. Even if you come from a wealthy family, it still wouldn’t be easy. The profession reeks of nepotism. My father is a first gen who became a senior, he decided to stay in India instead of doing an mba in the us. He makes good money now but still regrets it. He feels he has lost half of his life doing this. He may have a fancy car and a fancy house but he feels like he could’ve done something more rewarding. Sorry for rambling.

I genuinely believe that the following colleges offer equivalent opportunities for a student to pursue whatever they want to: NLS, NALSAR, NUJS, NLUJ, NLUD, GNLU, NLIU (in no particular order)

If a student is even remotely diligent, these colleges give enough exposure to almost every opportunity.

[I say this as someone who has been working in the industry for four years now, having seen people from these colleges doing whatever they want to if they are diligent]

Hey Hi,
Litigation is the most fulfilling profession. Only caveat, that you should not join this profession from livelihood perspective.

If you have a good source of financial support [Spouse in Govt job, politician, Big businessman], then you may start your practice as a way of helping others and serving society.

It is not very philosophical but only in few years you would gather a good reputation and then money would automatically start flowing and can be treated as your extra goodies.

Alternatively, if you do not have a financial support then transaction based law is better.

Reason: Transaction based law is more paying as the Client is paying and receiving services;
Dispute resolution is basically a gamble on the outcome and therefore clients are reluctant to pay.

Godfather, HC practice vs Lower Court practice and other things all either corroborate or erode away in the light of financial aspect and its fixed source.

Seriously! This is not a troll comment so kindly pay attention.

The above comment is one of the most idiotic and uninformed comments on LI.

Generally speaking, in most professions law/finance/mgmt consulting/etc etc. 90%+ professionals dont do cutting edge work and are employed for run off the mill tasks that dont really test their proff. competence. In fact, in most corp. jobs an overwhelming majority is engaged in copy paste type work.

Now, clerical/low end/compliance work related comments etc. alluding that work of a corp lawyer is not valued. It depends on the lawyer, practice area and expertise. Corp lawyers - anti-trust, fin tech, IP, debt, complex M&A work are valued in the market a lot. They get complex matters/deals done which are untested, device complex structures and assist in developing market leading products that test the boundaries of law.

Furthermore, a lot of corp lawyers also play a big role in corp law policy making which is really an invaluable contribution.

So if you are not one of those, try and do some cutting edge work and then see the diff. in how you are treated and valued.

Also, the above is true for litigation too. Not every litigation lawyer who appears in routine matters and drafts petitions, plaints etc. is doing a great job. Doing cutting edge work like the lawyers who argued the cryto case in SC is what is valued.

Hope this response makes sense to all those who agree with the above comment and the comment from Good Morning Dear who only seem to know the PE lawyer drafting universe.

Thank you for your comment.

For context, yes, I am a partner in a Tier-1 firm.

It's interesting that you choose to believe that I am misrepresenting myself, when all I'm doing is presenting a different view on the subject at hand. Just because you don't seem to agree with my views (and I believe I have tried to be balanced in my earlier comment) does not necessarily make them biased, as you seem to indicate. Nor does it amount to misbranding someone's advice. Since you seem to quite concerned with the apparent lack of thought in my comment, I'd like to return the unsolicited advice and encourage you to think twice before articulating your opinion in regards to what constitutes a biased opinion.

Perhaps I should have been clearer, my comment was not directed towards the specific set of Tier-1 professionals who graduate from Tier-1 law schools, since there's nothing in OP's question to indicate they are from a Tier-1 law school. My comment was directed towards the legal fraternity as a whole, while includes the Tier-1 law firm professionals as a subset. To that end, the underlying opinion in my comment is that if one doesn't have any networks to rely on, and chooses to engage with recruiters, they should engage with those who have their best interests in mind while they look out for your new role. As to such recruiters being in an underwhelming majority, you would agree that this is not necessarily factually accurate. Your opinions (and even mine for that matter) are merely subjective and contextual to our personal experiences, since I don't believe either of us has really conducted an objective study on the matter at hand.

I'm not going to engage with you on the benefits and pitfalls of engaging with recruiters. As you have rightly indicated, we are all entitled to our opinions, and I respect all opinions on this thread, even though some of them have been branded as "facts". However, choosing to be vitriolic in the manner we describe individuals in a profession is not really "calling a spade a spade". If recruiters were in fact "utterly useless" or "loons", I wonder why the industry (and this includes Tier-1 law firms) chooses to routinely engage with them in the first place? Don't get me wrong, I don't mean we need to prioritise niceties over being pragmatic in our advice, but surely there's a better way to do without being disparaging of a profession?

Thank you.

I am amazed how much credence young lawyers are giving to CLAT as a merit measure. In the middle ranks, 5 marks are almost 900 ranks, do you really believe that a guy/gal who could solve 5 more paragraph GK questions has so much more merit as to lose top 7 colleges altogether? On the other hand, you might be aware that in 2020 at least 9 NRI candidates were in the Top 100.

I would suggest that please question the elitist CLAT exam where only English speaking elite qualify before questioning on NRI seats as if that is the biggest issue. My drivers daughter can hope to qualify top IIT with effort, but given her hindi medium education and general category status, i am not sure whether and if how many years she will take to qualify a top 7 NLU - i am at a loss to guide her much and coaching starts only at a certain level - but she can do great maths.

Please read up other reports where NRI candidates have scored as much /more than general category. Its the Foreign Nationals who score poor and that is the same at the IITs as well. Even in Medicine, NRI candidates enter Kasturba Medical College at 60,000 NEET rank, Vs. 20,000 for general but most perform as good or as bad with as large as a 40,000 rank difference.

Like the IAS, getting a good CLAT rank seems to give the person a sense of entitlement for Life. But the ranking is so fragile - I would guess at least 80% of the top 500 qualifiers will not be able to repeat their performance. I have friends at SRCC Delhi who got 100% in tenth but even they are not comfortable stating that they would be able to repeat the marks they received. SIr/ma'am, 3-5 marks dude in a a Scholastic aptitude test, come to think of it and i can sit on that Rank for life (or till the time you do anything worthwhile in life - when you stop commenting on boards like these)

Good luck to all and god bless

It isn't the end of the world.
You have the rest of your life to do remarkable and amazing things.

You are on the right track by asking about your options.
My recommendation would be to talk to people within a profession that interests you and find out what would be a good way to go. No matter what profession or area you are in, you can always make an impact. Even in law there might be options open. Keep an eye out.
Wish you luck for the rest of your life.

Hey!

Try to figure out why it didn't go well. Was it because of less preparation or because competitive exams are something you are not good at.
If latter is the case, then it is time to rule out CS, CA, UPSE, Judiciary, bank exams, RBI, Nabard, SEBI, MBA etc. Almost all of these papers test your logical reasoning, maths and english skills initially.

What you can do next depends upon your 12th class stream. If you are from a science background, you can pursue BSc, MSc and then try to get into academia or research.
If you are from arts background, you can perhaps try journalism, hotel management, English Hons. etc.
Economics and statistics Hons. is an option for you if you are from commerce stream.

Now if you feel that you are somewhat good at competitive exams and that you can improve over time, as others suggested, you can join a local college temporarily and continue preparing for clat 2022 and other law entrance exams.

However if you are not interested in law at all, try shifting to a metro city and pursue a course like BAF, Bcom Hons etc. Side by side try to prepare for CFA or MBA entrance or try to clear CA groups one by one.

All the best !

8 days from TS signing, review of VDDR, documentation to closing.

Highlights:

I slept a total of 10 hours over those 8 days.

Lived only on a combination of redbull, pizza, coffee and Pan-D capsules.

Spent about 60% of that time in a conference room entirely with the other side lawyers. Actually became really good friends with my counter-part.

Yelled (literally) at my partner for trying to go home at 10.30 PM while we were taking a break during negotiation.

Drafted an absolutely insane earn-out clause at about 3.30-4 AM in the morning which to this day maybe my best work.

Was insane but so SO satisfying. Wish all deals closed that quickly. Also got a vacation of about 3 weeks for closing the deal that quickly and with that many things moving.

Regardless of whichever of these two you graduate, your opportunities after college will be the same - be it corporate placements or foreign university admissions or any other alternative career. NUJS may have a slight edge in terms of recruitment number but that won't matter unless you end up at the near bottom ranks of the class. If your rank is decent, then be it NLUJ or NUJS, you'll end up in the top 6 firms anyway. Foreign law firm offers will be 2-3 in the batch and they fluctuate every year between the top 4-5 colleges.

In terms of extra curriculars also, they're equally matched. Mooting debating achievements also keep fluctuating between law colleges every year but both have their long list of achievements in that arena. In terms of sports, NLUJ being the larger campus will have good sports facilities on campus but NUJS makes up for it with the Sports Authority of India (SAI) and the Salt Lake Stadium at walking distance.

So don't be bothered by rankings etc. The only criteria on which you should base on your choice on between these two is the quality of college life. In terms of people, you'll find smart people at both places. NUJS has a huge advantage in terms of location - right in the hub of Salt Lake City with malls, restaurants, pubs and cinema at walking distances. NLUJ will be a remote campus - but that may be an upside if you prefer isolation.

Yes, they do. Lord Denning, regarded as probably the greatest English judge of the 20th century, had in fact studied mathematics at Oxford before taking up law. And before becoming a judge he was King's Counsel.

To facilitate entry of people from fields other than law, in England there is a bridging exam to enable non-law graduates to practise law. (Probable reason: they bring a different perspective).

This is a very simplified / generalized view on how law firm life plays out.

To be clear - after all the general gyaan about competence, legal skill, hard word etc etc. the corporate law firm career is a career where you are paid primarily for stress management.

Stress comes in various shapes and forms.

When you are an intern, it comes from the possibility of unemployment.

When you are an associate - it comes from your SA, PA / Partner.

When you are an SA, it comes from your associate not doing their job properly but also from your PA / Partner.

When you are a PA / Salaried Partner, it comes from your associates / SAs not doing their job properly, but also the client possibly complaining about the matter to your partner, and then your partner yelling at you.

When you are an partner, it comes from your client dropping you / not paying your fees etc. Your associates not doing their job properly etc. etc.

The more stress you can manage - the better you will be at being a corporate lawyer. That doesn't mean that just because you are good at stress management you will be a good corporate lawyer, but being a good corporate lawyer (or one who makes it up the chain of command) will inevitably mean you are good at managing stress.

From a "making it" point of view, what you need to know is that - everyone finds their balance / their place where they are happy to stabilize. Some folks move on from law firms to in-house jobs - this works out in some cases, and in some cases it does not.

For me - I moved on from a Tier 1 practice to a relatively new firm and it worked out great for me. I make roughly as much as my peers now (actually more in some cases) - and my life is entirely within my control. I sometimes get to take afternoon naps and most evenings I have time to read some parts of a book, go exercise etc. It works for me, and I know a few others who also have a decent life, but that's not the case for anyone working in a Tier 1 practice. You are there to make money for the main families / core partners - and till you are servicing their income, there will be no break.

Based on the discussions on the LI threads, articles and data available online, i have tabulated this to provide easy reference for law freshers:

Trilegal: 13.2 + 2.2
KCO: 14.4 + 1.8
CAM: 13.5 + 1.5
SAM: 15
AZB: 14 + 1.5
L&L: 13.8 + 2.2
JSA: 11 + 2 ( 6 month probation as JA (60k); 8% bill sharing A1 above)
TTA: 13 + upto 40%(usual 10-20%)
S&R: 13.2 + 3
NDA: 16.2 +1.2 ( employees not retainer)
DSK: 10
Induslaw: 12 + 1.2
Lexygen: 15 + bonus (no minimum, up to 1.2L)
LKS: 9
Veritas: 14
Samvad: 10.8 or 4.8 or 7.2
ELP: 9.6 + 1.2 or 7.8 + 20k
Bharucha: 9 + 1
Pioneer: 9.6 + upto 40%
Poovayya: 9
WG: 6.6
HSA: 6
Finsec: 10.8 + 4.5
DMD: 7.8
PDS: 7.8
Rajani: 6-7
Tatva: 6-7
Algo: 6-7.2
Anoma: 4.8 -5.4
Acuity: 9-10
Rajaram: 6-7.2
Juris Legal: 5.4
SpiceRoute: 6
P&A: 12 + 2
Regstreet: 4.8-6
LexConsult: 7.5
Ikigai : 4.8-5.4
Desai & Diwanji: 7.2 + 60k (2% bill sharing A1 above)
KLaw: 4.8
Tuli & Co.: 6

The generalizations in your answer and the confidence with which you seem to propogate advice with your half-baked knowledge of the role of how law-firm recruitments work, is striking. Perhaps you may not have had a good experience. That isn't however reflective of how the process really is. Not everyone is as privileged as OP to have received a PPO, or graduate from top-tier law law school (I'm presuming), or start their careers in a Tier-1 firm. To that end:

1) Your presumption that most recruiters don't engage with the hiring partners is flawed. As someone who has seen both sides of the process (as a professional looking for a new role, and a partner who recently hired for her team) I can tell you that a large part of what you have mentioned in your comment is inaccurate. Yes, it's true that the firm's HR team is also involved in the process but the relationships that most recruiters tend to build, are those with the hiring partner. The role of the HR in the process is that of execution - to assist the partner in interviewing professionals and on-boarding them once an offer is accepted.

2) To your point that recruiters tend to mislead and lie to candidates, I'd agree to the limited extent that yes - there are some bad apples in the bush, and yes I have had my share of bad experiences. Does that mean all recruiters are the same? Absolutely not. You can distinguish the good from the bad, right away. Choose not to engage with the ones that you know are full of shit. From my experience, the good recruiters - and I'm not speaking about companies here - but recruiters as individuals, tend to engage and build relationships with professionals on a human level - to the extent that a certain recruiter from one of the firms that's been mentioned in this thread, took the time and effort to actually understand my goals and aspirations before specifically pitching my candidature to the hiring partner in the firm - as opposed to certain other recruiters who just forward resumes en-masse to firms.

3) To your point about "dilly-dallying": it's not in a recruiter's interest to waste time. From what I understand they get paid by commissions, and therefore they are incentivized to close positions quickly.

4) Yes, sending resumes directly to someone mid-level or higher may work better than going through a recruiter - but that holds true for those who have alumni networks to rely on. I reiterate, what about someone who doesn't have these networks to rely on?

Lastly, let's just try to be nice when you speak about folks in other professions? At the end of the day everyone's trying to earn a living and I'd like to believe that all of us, whether as lawyers, HR's, or recruiters,, try to do so by doing an honest day's work. Calling someone 'utterly useless' or a 'loon' speaks more to your character and the myopic nature of your personality, than anything else.

Peace.

This is 2021's SSR-Rhea Chakraborty story so that people stop focussing on third wave, vaccines and Pegasus. Let's stop getting distracted by it or even making it a talking point.

I am sure most sensible people already know this. And I hope that this is the last (non troll) comment on this thread.

THE END.

There are very few firms in India with dedicated International Arbitration (IA) practices. These teams are already fairly large, and therefore competition for a position is stiff. Add to the mix the significant number of returnees from foreign LLMs looking for IA jobs in India, and things get even more competitive.

The foreign job market in IA is cutthroat, with competition from highly qualified foreign students and lawyers for a very small number of roles. The two primary routes to a job in IA abroad are a training contract and an LLM. The latter route would in all likelihood only lead to internships (and not permanent roles) at IA practices. You can then try to convert these internships into an Associate role.

It is quite unusual to see foreign firms hire IA associates directly from Indian firms- I cannot think of any recent examples.

In my experience, being qualified in a second jurisdiction will not (by itself) make a significant difference to your prospects of being hired, although it will definitely benefit your practice. There are a number of courses (equity and trusts, commercial remedies) that we did not study in law school in india that you may need to be familiar with as an IA lawyer, especially if you work in a common law jurisdiction. Qualifying in a second jurisdiction (like England and Wales) will help with that.

Broadly true for all tier 1 / 2 firms:

- Flexible work: No
- Transport allowance: No
- Insurance cover: very low / insufficient (high deductible, co-payment, long list of exclusions (mental health, dentist etc.), hardly any premium hospital coverage, probably won't get a private room, cap on ICU charges). Make sure you buy additional insurance.
- Meal coupons: More relevant for corporates to save 30% tax, not relevant / given by law firms
- Free coffee/tea: Cheap ones offered by most firms, better to buy and keep your own in the office
- Laptop: Cheap, old one offered by most firms, better to buy your own and ask IT to set it up
- Internet Charges: It's not that expensive anymore but mostly firms wouldn't reimburse
- Mobile Charges: Most firms don't reimburse
- Other WFH equipment (printer etc): No
- Late night meals: Typically capped at a low amount and only if client is paying
- Late night cabs: Typically can be reimbursed but must use the cheapest class of uber / ola
- Paid vacation: Few firms had annual 2/3 day half paid retreat pre-covid, not anymore
- Paid Time Off: Yes on paper. Varies between 18-30 days. But in reality, you can't take all. Carry fwd not allowed usually.
- Gym / club membership: No
- Car leasing: No
- Education loan waiver / higher education sponsorship (part /full): Mostly no
- Paid events / masterclass: Mostly no
- Sabbatical: Mostly unpaid after a few years of work
- Paid team events (sports, stand up comedy): Mostly no
- Professional Memberships: To be paid by the employee
- Gratuity: No
- Marriage Bonus: Some firms pay a nominal amount

Can this be a game changer in the context of law firms and transactional practice (if the BCI decides to go ahead with these changes)? Seems to be a good move from the perspective of associates since they will have better avenues and more options.

Quote:

The Institute of Chartered Accountants of India has made way for multi-disciplinary partnership firms. Accounting and audit firms have now been allowed to tie up with other professionals like cost accountants, company secretaries, advocates, engineer, architects and actuaries.

Quote:

These multi-disciplinary partnership firms will provide an opportunity to smaller firms to come together and cater a range of professional services under a common brand to their clients who usually run from pillar to post to get professional help, Vikas Gupta, partner at Nangia & Co., said

Quote:

Though the ICAI regulations have now permitted partnerships with advocates, the Bar Council of India will need to made corresponding change to its rules as well, experts said. Similarly, Institute of Company Secretaries of India and Institute of Cost Accountants of India will need to amend their rules as well to make multi-disciplinary firms a reality.

Bad idea. If other students are reading this, please note that email trackers use a pixel based tracking system which is filtered out by many email screening software. It's possible that your email will be withheld as spam and your chances of getting an internship immediately go down the drain.

As a headhunter going through many profiles, I thought I'd share this advice since various people are posting information (in some cases disinformation) on LLMs abroad. The advice is for those returning to India only.

- In some countries a foreign LLMs are highly valued. Germany is an example that comes to mind. India is not such a country.

- In India, what matters most is where you did your BALLB from, plus your work ex. Unfortunately, we have an NLU/non-NLU caste system. This is furthered by lazy HR managers who find it easy to sort CVs on this basis. Plus. HR people generally like imposing hierarchies and making some people feel inferior. After a while, only your work ex matters, not your college.

- An LLM is seen more of an incremental addition, e.g. if you pursued a specialist course or made global connections that may be helpful down the line. Or perhaps a useful asset to show off in meetings with foreign clients. e.g. "Meet my associate Amit, who studied in London" may sound more impressive than "Meet my associate Amit, who studied in Bhopal".

- Keep in mind that 95% of partners do not have foreign LLMs. The 5% that do will probably look upon it favourably. The ones that don't will probably ignore it at best or make judgements at worst (e.g. rich kid went to NY/London/Singapore to party). Reasons like "I went to XYZ university abroad to deepen my knowledge and attend lectures by good faculty" is not good enough for the second type of partner. You may well be speaking to a GLC/DU alum who never attended a single lecture in his life and instead was a "lifelong intern". He/she fails to understand the value of an intellectually stimulating lecture, or writing a research essay supervised by a top academic, when one can learn by interning under a lawyer. He/she may even ask you: "Why do an LLM if you don't want to join academics?"

- The QS Law Ranking is a reliable indicator for selecting colleges, but certain ranks are questionable. It's best to stick with "safe" brand names if one is returning to India. These would be:

UK:Oxbridge/LSE/KCL/UCL/QM/Edinburgh/Warwick etc.

US: Harvard/Stanford/Yale/Columbia/Berkeley/Cornell/Chicago/Duke/Georgetown/Northwestern/GW etc.

Apart from the US and UK, the colleges below are very good, but not so familiar among partners and HR managers in India. Or rather, known only among a small circle.

Australia: Melbourne/Sydney/UNSW/Queensland/ANU

Singapore: NUS

Germany: RKU aka Heidelberg/HU aka Berlin/LMU aka Munich/GU aka Frankfurt/Hamburg Uni/Bucerius Law School

Sweden: Stockholm/Lund/Uppsala

France: Sciences Po

Switzerland: Graduate Institute Geneva

Netherlands: Leiden, Amsterdam

Bottomline: If you choose to do an LLM abroad, be confident about your choice and do what you want to do in life. If you are sensitive and hurt by judgmental comments from HR managers and partners, you will not succeed in any profession. Give your 100% whichever university you go to and be proud of that university and your degree. Also, there is nothing wrong in having a good time in NY or London or Berlin. Go to bars, concerts, etc. You won't get the opportunity ever again.

At this point of time, it frankly doesn't matter much. I would assume (and I'm not from Luthra) that based on the partners that have formed chosen to join Saraf, that it's unlikely that you'll lack decent work (having full and due regard to your level) to cut your teeth on. Luthra does carry a more "known" name - but this might not carry the sort of advantage that some might believe.

If you don't like working in either place after a year or two, jump ship. If you are feeling particularly nervous about the prospect of joining either of them at this time (and one cannot fault you for feeling that way, if that is indeed how you feel), then consider reaching out to partners in other firms in your chosen area of practice, and asking to talk. The job market for associates (including at the A0 level) is extremely skewed towards associates given the current state of demand and supply and it would be to your advantage to leverage this to the extent that you can.

Now, if I were you, I'd figure out which firm pays more and go with that firm. Worst case, things don't work out, you can jump ship and your base for negotiating your salary as a lateral would be better that way. While I generally advice against joining a place with the objective to leave: (a) law firms are by nature places where many more people end up leaving eventually, than those who stay back, and it's worth bearing this in mind; and (b) neither of Luthra nor the newly minted Saraf Law offices is doing particularly well, and it's not unreasonable to suggest that you might get better work at good teams in other firms.

Hope this helps. Also, if you're from a good college (which as far as I'm concerned means: any of the top 5 NLUs - NLS, NALSAR, NUJS, NLUJ and NLUD) jumping ship at this stage won't be hard. Just make sure your cover letter and resume are well put together and caption your subject correctly.

Again- a vast majority of Indian lawyers also either don’t care or have disdain/ are suspicious of NLU grads as well. But it hardly affects how well they’re employed or what options they have.

I guess it depends on what kind of academic OP wants to be? If they want to get any old job and stick around one institutions for years and years and retire as middle management- sure go do your llm from some random college.

If you want to be able to find jobs easier, and learn new things and have a shot at reaching the peak of your profession- give yourself every opportunity to get the best education possible.

Look the truth is - as elitist as it sounds- the best reason to get a degree from a world class university is because it simply makes you better equipped to do your job. As an academic- the more exposure you have to different institutions the better. It makes you better at research and it makes you better at pedagogy. Post graduate degrees in Indian legal academia are by and large just not funded/ designed to really work. These universities barely have the faculty to properly teach the five year course let alone actually mentor and graduate masters and doctoral candidates of any calibre. There are some exceptions but maybe less than what I can count on one hand.

This isn’t to say that the students who attend these programmes are inferior- they are just stuck in choices they made.

Well at the risk of being downvoted into oblivion. If your heart’s not in it, you’re sure you don’t want to work as a lawyer, AND you have plans to pursue a different undergrad post this, I would encourage you to go ahead and drop out.

As someone who was never passionate about or even interested in the law who just ended up in law school, I can empathise. Going through with the motions and getting your degree may in fact not be your best option. There’s a reason it’s called the sunk cost fallacy. Contrary to what some have suggested, a law degree at least in India at this time is not a very diverse one which will allow you to walk into different roles outside of the confined set of 3-4 spaces (lit, Corp, policy). It significantly hinders your ability to shift geographies as well, in case you are keen on working abroad. I don’t want to comment on law as a profession, because that is something you will have to make up your own mind on, and you can do that only after having tried it. I know a few who really do enjoy their work, and many who absolutely detest it.

So yes, do it, but only with a solid plan in place. It’s better to start over now and earn a different degree than jump around from law firm to law firm desperately looking for an out, to only finally realize that even if you do find a way, you will have to start over at close to age 30 or so.

Switched when I was an A3, some 6-7 months before becoming an SA. At the time it was easily the best decision to make, but I advice youngsters now to think it through because in-house is not all that it's made out to be. While it will vary by industry, it's common knowledge now that businesses have peaks where in-house counsel can be working 14 hours a day, 7 days a week. Pay disparity can also be very high because your peers will make partner with 10 years PQE while you'll be Manager Legal or VP legal at most. It's definitely better in terms of work life balance, but if you can tide it out in a law firm for 5-7 years and then make the switch, do it.

I know a lot of corp partners who hate Indian RW, can't stand the BJP and would rather vote CPIM. But they are not the trade unionist types. Their grouse is against the social aspects of RW and therefore they identify as left wing - sometimes incorrectly.
So I suspect a bunch of "leftists" or those alleged to be leftists are actually liberals.
They don't have a problem with free market. They have a problem with crony capitalism. This limits the analysis to VERY VERY few people in law firms.

In law firms, one tends to not have a problem facilitating deals since you are not actively perpetrating fraud. If your client is bribing the govt or getting favours from the govt, you are not a part of that shady part. at best, you can only suspect. Thankfully the big law firms are far away from being those kind of "fixers". Their role is limited to professionally assisting the deal within the limits of law for best outcome for the client. In that sense this debate is similar to lawyers who defend criminals - if on account of their legal skills, they are able to keep their client out of Jail (and not part of the crime), would you still condemn them?

You seem to confuse "leftists" with social activists. The two are worlds apart, even though there are some common threads. It's like saying "I know lots of BJP voters in Bengal and Karnataka, but they do not support compulsory Sanskrit/ Hindi, and do not want to go to Ayodhya to build a temple. Isn't this hypocrisy?"

Those who have a better idea of the real world than you will understand that there are no dichotomies in joining the formal economy ("capitalism"), while continuing to hold left-liberal political views.

We can recognize that our Apple iPhone and our fancy apartments are built on a form of exploitation and power imbalance. Because we are "leftists", some of us will consume the kind of media that highlights these stories, forcing Apple or the developer to change their practices.

We can also be leftists because we prioritize individual freedoms, like the right of two men to marry each other. This is in contrast to conservatives, who seek to "conserve" the status quo, and who prioritize the rights of the community ("gay marriage will tear apart the fabric of society") over the rights of the individual.

We can be leftists because we support free speech, and believe that the right to offend someone is greater than the right not to be offended ("jokes against religion will tear apart the fabric of society").

We can quote Marx (his most famous quote is "I'll be right here waiting for you", but he also said some good things about class struggles) and we can quote Chomsky (because his writings on propaganda are more relevant than ever, and give us the tools to understand how power tries to subvert truths).

We can be sympathetic to the social inequalities that far left political parties claim to stand for, while abjuring the methods that they use.

We can oppose some aspects of privatization, and support some aspects of the farm bills, because we take the effort to understand the problems they are trying to solve, the methods they are using to solve those problems, the trade-offs these methods involve, and the "winners" and "losers" of each approach. We don't go around on the Internet writing "leftists are frauds because they oppose the farm bills", and showing the world our ignorance.

We can also be leftists because we want to see a kinder, more empathetic, and more egalitarian society, instead of the shallow jingoism that we are being told to subscribe to.

We can be all of the above, while driving nice cars, wearing designer clothes, and being able to give directions from Galeries Lafayette to the Eiffel Tower.

What was your point, again?

In your first few years, all your seniors want to see is a good attitude, dedication, hardwork, and ability to put in the hours when necessary and for you to be conscientious. You should be able to absorb like a sponge and ask questions when you don't fully understand something. If you're a genius, then that's a bonus, but that's not what is expected when you first join.

The next few years after that is where you will be expected to start with the real "legal" work. Good drafting, good understanding of the basics you've picked up and how to come up with innovative solutions. This is the separating grain from the chaff phase. Some will excel. Others may not. But again, if the basics are all there - good attitude, dedication, hardwork, and ability to put in the hours when necessary and for you to be conscientious - noone will fire you especially at this stage when the grunt work of training you up has already happened.

Believe me when I say this: noone wants to fire anybody unless there's absolutely no work around. The pandemic may have cut down on business for a few firms, but even then people would not have let go of anyone, unless they were already on shaky ground before.

Good luck!

I was fired as an A2 and it was my rock bottom moment in life. The partner I worked for, a Banking and Finance partner at a Tier 1 had a habit of hiring indiscriminately with joining bonuses, 30% pay hikes, the whole package. What I didn't realise was that he was simply poor at managing resources and hired a bunch of people when they had some active mandates and then fired them when work was slow. After my exit I asked around and found out that the team had fired some 6 odd people in 2.5 years.

I was with one of the most sought after law firms some years ago. The hiring that happened in my team was disproportionate to the work it had. I would go to the extent of saying that the hiring I witnessed back then was rather directionless. I was, nevertheless, excited about this firm's 'up and coming' profile and my future there, which saw an abrupt and unfortunate end - when I reached out to my supervising partner, informing this partner of not having much work. I was reminded of my every omission and shortcoming and advised to resign. This conversation left me feeling worthless and depressed. The embarrassment of being told by former colleagues/ staff - what happened to you wasn't right or fair offered little solace and came as a fresh slap on my face. I was seen as "damaged goods" in the job market, and there was no escaping it. It took a lot of effort and initiative to keep going.

To those of you who are experiencing anything close to this, my advice is as follows - believe in yourself, you've got this. You will, with time, find your niche and people. Trust the process. Work hard. Most importantly, be careful of the criticism that you take to heart. If the criticism isn't constructive and is a flimsy attack on your self-worth and defines where you belong, trash it right there. It doesn't deserve your time.

Get a really good college and a reliable bunch of friends, nothing would happen to you kid. One is not forced to do anything they vehemently oppose at NLS (atleast not when I was there). I too once was like you- sheltered, ready to pee pants at first sight of drunk seniors. Do not worry at all. Prioritise clearing the exam rather than wander over here. Illegal stuff happens everywhere be it IITB or Stephens. Not much you can do to change that.

The full list:

Mohit Saraf
Bikash Jhawar
Vaibhav Kakkar
Vikrant Kumar
Gayatri Roy
Lokesh Shah
Rohit Raghavan
Sahil Arora
Abir Dey
Snigdhaneel Satpathy
Sanjeev Kumar
Vivek Pareek
Abhishek Swaroop
Arjun Rajgopal
Nipun Vaid
Priyamvada
Rohan Shah
Sanjeev Sharma
Akshay Nagpal
Akshay Jain
Murtaza Zoomkawala

S&P can help mentioning practice area against each.

I work at senior position in a Tier 1 firm. But I am not from a 5 year law college. I earned my bachelor's degree from one of the most reputed colleges of the country. I have friends who studied at IIT/NID/NIT/TISS/NLUs/Stanford/Vienna/Edenburgh and so on and so forth.

From my experience and from others, I could say with certainty that you will a very wide spectrum of people in every institution. Interactions with diverse personalities make you humble and nonjudgmental.

I m a T totaller, but I am able to enjoy a nice party where peers are gulping down gallons of alcohol. And it has never been the case that others have ever tried to force me to take drugs or alcohol. They have always been respectful and protective.

Just let your boundaries be known to your peers beforehand. Don't do things which you don't like just to appear cool. If you don't bow down to peer pressure in the firsr semester, you are set for the rest of your college life

You will also find MANY others in the college who share your likes / dislikes. So it's not like that that everyone who goes to NLU will turn out a junkie or alcoholic.

Folks, what is the market practice for the notice period of associates at corp law firms? I joined a mid-size firm since graduating in 2019, and have a three-month period, but I've seen some people leaving within a month after serving the notice. However, my team has seen quite a few exits in the last 6 months, and the recent quitters were made to serve the entire three months of notice period.

I've started hunting for a new job, but the two-month notice period seems a bit of a hurdle as most recruiters are looking to fill the positions immediately. Also, my retainer only has a one way buyout clause in favour of the firm, so there's no way I can buy it out (as suggested in some other thread here).

Would really love to have some suggestions on how to tackle this problem. I was thinking of putting in the papers and then starting the job hunt, but that seems a bit of a risk right now given how the job market is, and I feel if I'm not able to land a job within three months, I'll lose all leverage at future interviews.

Has anyone left their firm without serving the entire notice period? And can anyone give me an idea as to what consequences I could be facing?

Would really appreciate any and all advice. Thanks in advance!

Yes. Wikipedia does a good job of weeding out fake news. Sadly credible "right wing" news organisations are very few. Most of them prefer to run on propaganda that generates instant awe, instant fear and imagined moral panic.

Like seriously. How many ground level reporters does OpIndia have? Or even Republic TV for that matter. Contrast that with the wire. Credibility comes with investment in ground level reporting. RW media doesn't need that because business model of villifying minorities does not require ground level investment. It can be done by sitting in one's living room and attacking Danish Siddiqui for hurting Hindu feelings or simply saying "lot of conversions are happening... Oo .. aa.. get scared". For facts, RW wing website regurgitate govt press releases. Where's the need for reporting?

Lol kid, I don't even know where to begin with you but let me just address a few things about the merits of what you said -

i. Sure, the students who make it through to the top few NLUs need to demonstrate a basic degree of competence in CLAT but that's the extent of it. It is a very easy exam that barely requires intense preparation of the kind other entrance exams for engineering and medicine do, and is attempted by a fraction of the students that give other said entrance exams. It's also largely based upon chance. I know of a fair number of people (outside our college too) who got top ranks in CLAT but failed to get an equivalent rank in AILET (even after accounting for the far lesser number of applicants for the AILET). Similarly, I know of people who got into NLUD but couldn't even make it to HNLU, NLUO and the likes (not that those colleges are bad but you get what I mean, I hope). So your claims of best minds from around the country might be divorced from reality, I am afraid. I don't mean to put you down, and every achievement ought to motivate us to do better, but don't base your self worth on your CLAT rank or college - there's a lot more to your legal career than just that.
ii. As for your claims of moots, etc., I understand there are arguments to be made about overall batch achievements but you ought to look at how well some kids in Jindal are doing. They've done better than our college in some moots and have a fair number of publications as well. Which is to be expected considering the amount they invest in faculty remuneration to get the best there is (including alums from our college). This combination of talent and family connection that some Jindal kids have, will leave others in the dust. Similarly, some kids from Symbiosis Pune have also demonstrated a significant degree of competence in my experience.
iii. There is not much parochialism being eschewed in law schools, and you realize that soon enough once you're actually there and see people up close. I understand why you'd blindly fall for Bobde's words with him being an ex-CJI but, in case you have the pleasure of doing offline college, trust me, it's going to include a lot of visits to SDL (if it's still open,) the old city and returns therefrom in a stupor. I'll be glad if the college suddenly becomes an island of parochialism being eschewed but that was never the case when I was there (and my batch and preceding batches did rather well for themselves but still my statement stands in light of the facts). Also, I'd be fairly vary of the words of a guy who literally cannot keep his pants up in public besides seemingly abandoning the functions of his office. When you read more law and assess judgements in that light, you might realize what I mean.

I hope the above is a clarification at least in some regard. I have no intent to "rebut" you, that would indicate me caring about this far too much lol - this is merely me bored and rambling after a fair few JDs. This is merely me providing my POV as an alum to a current student. Feel free to disagree but you'll see the world of the ways soon enough.

Also, I've seen some of my colleagues from private universities be far better at some things than I am - and, even if I do say so myself, I've done fairly well for myself considering I work with one of the top teams in the country when it comes to my practice area. So, once you're out of a law school, it's all down to your competence and ability to perform in high stress situations. Build your self worth on your individual achievements and not just associational pride. In case you do that already, I'll be glad to see kids from my alma mater on the right track to success.

Do not let issues of pronunciation, limited vocabulary, or limited fluency (verbal) bog you down. The intent of this post is to help you see why this will not be a challenge (for the coming few years) and assure you that there is

In the initial years of your law firm, the only expectation from associates is to churn out agreement drafts, opinions, memos and emails which are:

1) sound in law, backed by solid legal research;

2) SIMPLY written without use of unnecessary words like wherefore etc and other fancy/archaic words;

3) presented with a logical flow; and

4) properly formatted.

If you have all this, then no matter - small town background, halting spoken English, etc. don't really matter. At least, till you're an SA.

Now here comes the fun part, Partners and PAs (if they're lucky enough to have a professional Partner invested in their growth), like to hog client calls, negotiations and all other external non-verbal communications, to the exclusion of others. Therefore, you're spoken English won't really be tested for the longest time. Which, theoretically, gives you ame time to up your game on that front (if you're so inclined).

A word to the wise - your spoken English is definitely an asset, but it's peripheral in value at best. No amount of vocabulary, accent (fake?) or gift of the gab can compensate for abject lack of legal skills and knowledge.

Let me give you an anecdote - I was working on a deal 3 years ago opposite a partner from a firm in Delhi (the one imploding now) and in the initial negotiation call I came away feeling really impressed by her accent and the way she spoke. I had been just staffed on the matter so I had no way to gauge her technical and legal soundness on the call. As the matter progressed, she kept up with the accent and it was clearer with each call that her knowledge was superficial at best and non existent at worst. This was painfully clear to our clients (high powered - eat their lawyer for lunch - PE folks) who would mute themselves and laugh at her in our conference room. The situation became so bad that my Partner, a normal without accent English speaker, was clearly dominating the negotiations and the counter party client used to cringe at their counsel's negotiations.

Moral of the story: all that glitters isn't gold. Have faith, don't compromise on your legal skills and if you feel so strongly, work on your spoken English (trust me you have time).