Everything was good but later the committee people make everything pathetic and surely you guys IPL01 are cowards and now you will pay for your mistakes. But for sure I will make those committee people cry and living hell. They will ask for a dignified life but won’t get. The committee was headed by so called bangali mota

sad to +1 this i know this comment will get -ve but this is true in the same boat as now i reaching the marraigable age, nobody in my current pay-scale is accepting me (despite good bilt and looks).

luckly left the lit side joined papa ka galla ( bussiness)

best choice trust me

(i am from a decent T2- nlu good internships and even master from london but still i was not able to break 50k payscale.

I'd heard somewhere (won't swear to it, as I don't follow this stuff regularly) that the UPSC CSE age limit has been increased, even for general candidates. Can't find the exact website where I saw this, but distinctly remember seeing it. Changed to 32, I believe. So why not try again? You've gotten some life experience also now, maybe give it a thought?

lets understand some basic logic propositions. a person can be designed a senior advocate, get briefed by the top firms and still be a hate monger.

and attempting something does not make a person an intellectual or worthy of being platformed. to spell out the most basic issue, he cant even distinguish between descriptive and normate claims. to make it clear, my issue with him is not his ideology. i think all intelelctual work is ideologically driven. my issue with him is the basic lack of respect for theory and method. a bricolage of things that sound interesting is not intellectual work. its what we did in school for our 8th grade projects.

Its a rebuttable presumption after a certain point. Do a network analysis of how NLS faculty all know each other from before being hired and you'll find a lot of these ties go deep.

Some of these professors will resent the patronage system that led to corruption in previous generations but essentially engage in the same thing themselves.

There was a person involved in teaching law subjects at the university who did not have an LLM. They had an MA. According to BCI regulations they were explicitly not even qualified to teach law courses or to be hired as an assistant professor of law. They have recently left the university to go pursue a phd somewhere else but it was clear to their students that the legal training was just not there and instead you just got social justice pablum.

The point is that you shouldn't confuse polish for value. Candidates who paid their way into fancy degrees abroad who do not have publications or did not win scholarships and who often have nothing to recommend them at all are being preferred over equally qualified if not more experienced candidates. You draw this binary between - foreign llm good/ indian llm bad- maybe. to some extent. Yale llm is better than NLS. Sure . is a UCLA/QMUL/ Melbourne/ Random European University ? I'm not so certain. Thats not even a function of how much english you have- thats a function of how much money you have. How many of the young people hired even have a decent publication record or any teaching experience? This is the jindalification of NLS to be honest.

I understand why people are defensive of Sudhir- he came in when there was deep rot within the system and seemed to remedy some of its worse excesses. The kind of people he has hired- would never even have applied to NLS in years prior. But that doesnt mean hes perfect and we need to ignore all the corruption that goes on. Sunlight is a disinfectant always.

Mohit is a wonderful guy. Soft spoken and knows his stuff.

Akila is nice but always treats everyone like a junior associate. You win her approval and you will learn a lot.

Anchal.... brilliant but anger management issues. Thick skin needed.

Anshu... Anchal part 2 in the making hope doesn't get to that. Otherwise a wonderful person.

In the end it doesn't mattwr who you work with. All that matters at CAM is who is in the circle of trust or the flavour of that time. If you work for someone in those categories, you got it made. Else youre just there for the stamp, to learn whatever max you can learn and then just go somewhere else where they actually treat merit as merit.

because other NLUs aren't the only universities in the world. Many of these people are in private universities, some are in universities abroad. Do you know what it means to have books be published by OUP/CUP ? do you know what it is to have publications in nature? do you know what a small percentage of academics in India ever have that? You're dismissing these candidates without even knowing who they are- exactly what nls might be doing- because what? arrogance? if someone isnt in sudhirs immediate orbit are they by definition not good academics? i'm talking about people who are internationally competitive who have told me these things.

Why is your knee jerk reaction not- yes we should have transparency? why is it- oh youre just talking about people who might be gaming the system instead of people who are very credible? you dont even know who they are!

You will have to weigh the pros and cons.

5 Years vs. 6 Years

A BA Hons / Program degree and then an LLB degree vs. An integrated BA.LLB degree

Who knows after spending 3 years doing a BA, you change your mind and don't want to pursue law.

Further, there is no guarantee whether you will make it to CLC, the competition at PG level is quite intense. While it has the greatest litigation legacy in the country (most judges and senior advs are from CLC/ LC-I / LC-II), it lacks in placements.

Hi, happy to hear about your transition into your new role. This is probably a long shot but I'm in quite the opposite situation. Currently in-house (T1 NLU, 2025 batch) but want to move to a law firm [T1/T1/Boutique] very soon. My current compensation and growth prospects will not support my family situation and the learning curve has also been disappointing to say the least. Could you please provide any guidance on how to proceed? I have started emailing HRs, partners but no response yet. Almost all recruiters require prior law firm work ex. So I feel I'm on my own for now. I'd genuinely appreciate any help. TIA.

As someone who is new to this profession, the workplace culture I’m witnessing feels jarring and deeply unsettling. The stories, and at times the conduct, I’ve observed in Tier-1 law firms suggest a pattern of behavior that seems normalized, even expected.

Why are young professionals taken so much for granted? Why does no one meaningfully speak up?

Is this profession structured in a way that discourages dissent? Or are we conditioned early on to believe that tolerating mistreatment is simply the price of entry?

What troubles me most is that such abusive dynamics seem increasingly archaic in many other professions I encounter, and yet here, they persist. I’m no longer just frustrated; I’m genuinely curious about the structural and cultural roots that allow this to continue.

It should be State name + NLU + City. For example...

Maharastra NLU Mumbai

Maharastra NLU Nagpur

Maharastra NLU Shambhajinagar

I do condone one NLU per state only. But it's not possible for larger states like MH and UP.

The reason for state name first is because at the end of the day it's a state University. The only way we remove that is if NLUs become central universities, IoI or IoE. Till then State first.

My firm is a laggard at AI adoption and we cannot even access any AI tool on a browser. But I have been using Claude Cowork outside of office for a month now. What I found is that if you give Claude Cowork a set of facts, refer certain laws that Claude Cowork must refer to, allow it to carry out further research, and put across detailed queries, just like a request for opinion, Claude Cowork provides you with detailed answers and can even create a memo for you with a disclaimer that the output does not constitute legal advice. One must check Claude’s output for correctness anyways, but the level of detailing, structure, and thought process applied by Claude Cowork each time blew me away. The output at this stage seems to be as good as a first year associate’s, and sometimes even better. I also tried another feature where I saved all the relevant legislations and case laws in a folder and gave Claude Cowork access to that folder. I instructed Claude to only refer to the material in that folder for generating output. It again did a fantastic job on the queries. All in under 30 mins every time. It does exhaust tokens very fast, which get reset every 5 hours. But Claude Cowork picks up unfinished tasks from an earlier session and can complete them in the next session when tokens are reset. If it continues to improve in the coming weeks and months, then I guess by the end of this year, Claude Cowork could be a legitimate contender for wider adoption in law firms.

I'm a first generation law aspirant, currently eyeing MHCET and CUET UG. Couldn't do well in CLAT due to multiple reasons. I live in Delhi and currently feel like corporate would be a safer option for me, given my situation.

I'm very confused about which colleges to consider rn:

For MHCET, I'd have to travel all the way to Maharashtra, get a place to stay, travel to my exam center and then return back to Delhi. All this for roughly 25 seats in the open category.

From CUET, my option would be to opt for the BA hons program and then go for 3 year LLB later. Either that or go for a partial drop for CLAT again this year.

My father suggests that I consider CUET rather than MHCET due to several reasons:

1. Literally everything is stacked against me in MHCET - travelling, accommodation, less seats etc.
2. I already live in Delhi so DU would be a safer option
3. DU is much more prestigious than Maharashtra University, and so is their law program (so he says)
4. He's also concerned about the mob culture and culture war against outsiders in Maha but that's a concern for later

I'm not exactly fond of the idea of pursuing a non professional degree for the first 3 years. I also haven't really heard much good stuff about DU's CLC or it's placements, or even it's litigation legacy.

Besides, the tentative dates for both the exams is somewhat close, so chances are that I might have to prioritise one over the other. Please help me out here.

I am currently in the 5th year of the BA,LLB at NALSAR (2021-2026 batch). I can name at least four current faculty members at NALSAR Hyderabad who have earlier completed their BA,LLB at the same institution:

1) Dr. Anup Surendranath - BA,LLB 2006

2) Dr. Aymen Mohammed - BA,LLB 2015

3) Anindita Mukherjee - BA,LLB 2015

4) Sunishth Goyal - BA,LLB 2019

At the same time, it is also true that some of our best faculty members have moved out of NALSAR in the last 2-3 years. Most of them have gone to NLSIU. Since I was directly taught by some of them, I will readily admit that people like Sudhanshu Kumar (Company Law), Pranav Verma (Criminal Law, Evidence), Sidharth Chauhan (Constitutional Law, Comparative Public Law) and Varun Malik (Contracts, Civil Remedies) were heads and shoulders above most of the new Assistant Professors hired by Prof SKDR. I have no doubt that people of that calibre will prosper at NLS as well.

However, all is not lost. NALSAR still has some very good teachers like Dr. Neha Pathakji (Taxation), Mr. Sourabh Bharti (Administrative Law, Intellectual Property), Dr. Srijan Sandip Mandal (Legal History), Dr. Balu Sunilraj (Political Science) and Dr. Rohan Cherian Thomas (Intellectual Property Rights). Some of the seniors like Dr. T. Kannan (Sociology), Dr. N. Manohar Reddy (English), Hota Agni Kumar (History) and Dr. Murali Karanam (Political Science) are also very good classroom teachers. They may not have the research output or the external visibility that some of the better known professors at NLSIU have, but they have given us a good education. Prof. Sitharamam Kakarala has also joined last year and has taken charge of the Ph.D. programme and is concentrating on the LL.M. students. In short, there is still a nucleus around which the institution can be rebuilt and improved.

Not everything depends on the personality of the VC. Prof. SKDR will at the most be in charge till 2030. He does not have a very good academic judgment (especially needed for selecting teachers) but he is exceptionally good at networking with Supreme Court Judges, Ministers and Bureaucrats. That also carries certain benefits for the institution at large. In comparison, Prof. Sudhir Krishnaswamy is a much better academic, but when it comes to administration, he has repeatedly made decisions in a hurry without thinking about their practical consequences for the students at NLS. However, I must be objective and accept that on current form, NLSIU has a much stronger faculty pool and the main reason is the regular hiring efforts led by Prof. Sudhir.

Hey!

An ex placement rep from the outgoing batch here. Like any other law school this year- we had bad numbers in terms of Big name coming in that too coupled with the Big Guns going towards PPO structure. Given our Programme structure, the entire 6-7 months long internship window was designed for people to go under assessments.

Now with the market having the situation it has- whatever non T1s and in houses that we could get for assessments- students either backed-out; or those were not as good for them so they let those go washed out, with zero applications.

Yes there might or might not have been institutional oversights. However the people who were not just chilling or not being a good for nothing for the past five years are currently under assessments in good firms and in house teams, rather than feeling depressed and pathetic on an anonymous site.

Oh absolutely, everyone knows registration fees cover admin costs, judges, prize money, etc. and no one’s disputing that. The point is that most moots don’t bundle everything together and quietly label it “non-refundable.” They charge a nominal reg fee first, and only the teams that actually qualify for oral rounds are asked to pay for accommodation. Because, logically, you pay for accommodation when you’re… you know… going to be accommodated.

If ₹8,000 “includes accommodation” but 75% of teams never reach the stage where accommodation is even relevant, then what exactly was that component for? Either the accommodation cost was negligible (so why advertise it as included?), or teams paid for a service they were structurally eliminated from accessing.

It is very common, the senior I once worked with literally used to earn almost 70% of his income from this modern day dalali (albeit legal dalali nothing that involves bribes etc.) . yes, generally such lawyers take a cut from both parties and help them settle outside courts. Contacts in the judiciary could literally only be the ahlmad or readers who would verbally inform about date, provide order dasti more fast or otherwise inform verbally what took place before order is uploaded etc. Judges never indulge in such things. These seniors also have contacts with actual senior advocates and take a cut to connect parties with senior advocates, the senior only appears while the drafting, filing etc is all happening at a lower rate with said advocate, party pays senior only appearance fees and said lawyer gets a cut from that too. Rest as long as its not illegal I dont see the harm.

Currently NLUD, NLUJ, NLUO, NLUD (Tripura, NLUS (Sikkim) and NLUP (formerly RGNLU) use this branding. It will be easy for GNLU, MNLU, TNNLU and HPNLU to change to this branding: just bring the state name at the end. NLIU can also change easily to NLUB, by dropping "Institute".

But what about NLSIU, NALSAR and NUJS? Will they change?

More complicated will be certain NLUs that have been named after different people for votebank politics: HNLU, DSNLU (Vizag), DRBNLU (Haryana) etc.

https://www.barandbench.com/news/lawschools/rgnul-initiates-removal-of-rajiv-gandhi-from-name-to-become-national-law-university-punjab

I totally understand. All 6 years I abhorred work. But I was given to understand that it will be career suicide to move early because you will be stuck with a certain pay. My family situation meant I kept at it till I reached a level where the same till the end of my career will also do. Additionally, competition doesn’t have much in house scope. You must try exploring other practice areas in law firms if the ultimate goal is to move in house or if it’s okay with you considering what I said earlier to still move then you can move to a junior position. But you will have to relentless look. It can take months and years to figure out something that works for you. Make profiles on naukri and the like.

It all depends. In house folks don’t usually hire at lower levels. They start looking at the 4 year mark. There are specialised recruiters who just do in house hiring. There are more general ones too. It’s about being in the know and being present in the right place at the right time. Let your law firm recruiters know that you are looking to move in house in the long term and maybe a couple of years from now you will get the magic call.

Hi. I have now worked in this team for nearly a year. The matters in this team are great- both in banking and general corporate team. One will obviously learn a lot because of the nature of the transactions and in general there is a lot of work. On the work aspects- 10/10.

▮▮▮ A very hierarchy driven place, therefore, the junior folks in the team (including SA-1’s) are treated in a very bad way. One wrong and your MA or SA will complaint about you to the partners (yes, they still behave as if they are in school). A lot of times partners put juniors on hook and remind them that they can loose job in a second.

From money aspect, they are truly generous. Also, worth noting that I have personally not worked in a tier-1 law firm, so may be culture is bad at all places.

If you are happy at your current firm, and really not sure if you want to come here or not. Then please don’t come. You will be disappointed.

This thread explains why most law students end up unemployed and prove to be a burden on taxpayers. Useless AI generated verbose gibberish, which literally no one is interested in. While the world is moving on to edge and physical AI/ robotics, these randos (living off parents) are vociferously debating (on an anonymous online message board) "engagement" with constitutional law 😄

please avoid the Mahura folks. the couple of times I have sought their help, they actively held back info about the company putting the position on hold. I was informed on an off the record basis by one of the juniors from the company, who interviewed me in the first round. Priya Suvarna, Binu, Michael Page folks are better.

Never thought life would be this hard, working in two jobs in litigation getting only 18k in the first and 25k in the next, and no scope for upward mobility despite being from a good college, masters, good internships, certificate courses, diplomas, moots, and whatnot. Turning 28 this year and wondering where did I go wrong. Whether law was even worth it. Regrets on not trying hard for corporate jobs/ judiciary/civil services/PSUs when the time was right and not being confident enough to leave toxic seniors sooner and falling for hollow promises. Age is not on my side and my parents make it a point to let me know how behind I am almost all the time. Others my age are earning well and settled.. yada yada. Life sucks, I know it could be worse but it feels like it already.

This place clearly sounds like it's upwards of 8/10! I have been eagerly trying to have them accept my internship application and have not yet cracked it. Do you even know what expectations of freshers in law firms are? lol. 3/10 with your description of the place sounds like you have a lot of personal bias!

my god do people not know how competitions work? all registration fees typically go toward prize moneys/ accomodation/ paying judges etc. even if you dont win a prize you still have to pay registration fee. even if you dont qualify for oral rounds you have to pay registration fee to be considered.

▮▮▮ are okay, they're lawyers they're more empathetic but they're still going to eventually ghost you.

The problem is the recruiters want you to believe that applying through them is the only option, but I've switched 3 times and I've only directly applied to the partner.

▮▮▮ told me that XYZ firm has rejected me and I can't apply for next 6 months. I applied directly to the partner next day, got hired in 3 weeks.

Idk how it internally works for them, but they rarely get stuff done.

Glad you have acknowledged this Ravi. Hope you treat this fairly and no negative consequences for those who actually take up the issues with you (because we all know then again that would be all over this thread).

Leadership which acknowledges the issues and is ready to work with the team to figure it all out is the kind of leadership which our firm needs.

https://www.livelaw.in/news-updates/international-digital-dispute-resolution-centre-iddrc-inaugurated-nfsu-gandhinagar-cji-surya-kant-525140

This is a fantastic development as it aims to expand India's push towards the adoption of technology-driven justice, enabling convergence between cyber forensics, digital evidence analysis, and legal adjudication. The IDDRC, the first of its kind in India, established under the aegis of the School of Law, Forensic Justice and Policy Studies, will facilitate dispute resolution relating to e-commerce/digital commerce transactions, fintech operations, cybersecurity breaches, data protection issues, and smart contracts.

Only NFSU could have done something like this.

Depends on organization. It can range from 12 to 16 LPA for 3-4 years PQE at the lower end and 30 to 40 LPA at the higher end. Funds, MNCs in Energy sector and few Indian corporates pay at the higher end. Otherwise, it is generally at the lower end. Also, keep in mind this is salary and not retainership fees. So tax deducted at source is higher when you are a salaried employee.

1. Well, a good grasp of English is, whether you like it or not, a prerequisit to having a good grasp of the law in many fields. Take international law, for example. Read Eliav Lieblich's paper, 'Doing Research in International Law'. He specifically says that if you can't 'access' at least one of the languages of English or French, you will have a lot of trouble working in international law. You don't need to be word-perfect, but understanding it is very much necessary. So your comment seems to be the paradigmatic (if you understand what that word means) case of sour grapes (a term used in Harry Potter, so you'd have to claim that HP readers are privileged now).

Sorry (especially to the moderators) if my comment sounds sarcastic. It's just that this nonsense has gone far enough. We need to face some facts. I am writing out these facts for the so-called non-privileged candidates who alegedly (and were I speaking in person, I would do an immitation of how Rick Jerome emphasizes the word "alleged" when doing an impression of Dr James Akrington at his most supersilious in Jerome's audiobook reading of Ngaio Marsh's 12th Roderick Alleyn book, 'Colour Scheme') got rejected because of their English-speaking skills, in sentences with only a main clause and no subordinate clauses, where possible. We are an ex-British colony. English is a very important language of our legal system. Our laws are written in English. We wouldn't have been seen to be as good a business proposition for foreign investors as we are, had it not been for English. The National Law School's medium of instruction is English. The works of legal philosophy important for our lawyers to understand are written in English. Why don't you sit down and do a massive translation project of Hart, Dworkin, Fuller, Raz, Frank, Bagehot, Llewellyn etc, into Hindi and other Indian vernacular languages? So were I the National Law School's head at the current moment, I would unapologetically say that any recruitment criteria that is a proxy for good English is a criteria worth retaining and strengthening further (especially if it involves rejecting you, the writer of the comment I am responding to).

2. This point can be much more briefly stated. Please elaborate, point by point, on all the gaps in the CV, profile, experience and knowledge of this person, that make him an unsuitable hire. And explain what qualifies you (and/or somebody else you know, mentioning no names of course) who would have been rejected, or has been rejected, under the current dispensation.

Hoping you haven't had to consult a dictionary too often to read this response.

Regards,

Somebody with common sense who doesn't hesitate to say what he means.

You don't have to believe anyone - go look at the case history and see who was involved at the high court level and the initial supreme court level. Look at the order of petition filing and arguments. All you need to get in Time is a good PR agent. Same for top journo interviews.

If even a word of what you said were true, obviously, it would be the scandal of the century in Indian legal education. But the key there is if.... And I think a pretty important key. Because the (and I am borrowing a very nice phrase a fellow commentator here coined) Sudhir-hating internet trolls are still very much alive and well. The most charitable interpretation of your comment is that you wrote it when high, confusing Sudhir with one of the other corrupt NLU VCs.

I will go till the end of my days, seemingly, fighting this appalling, irresponsible, imprecise, dangerous, misleading, malicious usage of the word "discrimination".

Please stop using "discrimination" like this. It doesn't mean what you think it means. The uni you attended isn't an immutable characteristic. Sure, societal phenomena related to immutable/protected characteristics may have played a part in where you eventually landed up, but declaring your university educational circumstances to be as much beyond your control as your school circs would have been deprives you, as an adult, totally of a sense of agency. And may I point out that to the uninformed outsider, this brash, careless, dangerous, disappointing, ignorant and irresponsible use of "discrimination" might indicate as though your non-top-five or non-top-six law school didn't teach you what the unis you mentioned teach their students. Do you find even their mediocre students talking nonsense like this?

Why are those very people not working at the other NLUs then, who do go by solely such scores? There are very few people in other NLUs who are competent enough for current day NLS, and almost all of them have been invited at least once by Sudhir. API scores and 'decades of experience' do not make a good teacher, many career academics know how to game the system.