got a rank of 55X this year and planning to join bsc llb at nujs instead of hnlu and other tier 2 colleges, if i don’t get any tier1.

i have done my fair share of research.

1. there is a single placement cell for both BA LLB and BSc LLB. yes a batch hasn’t graduated till now but BSc LLB students get good internships if their CV is good (words of a senior who is pursuing BSc LLB there not mine)

2. Accommodation are 1/2 km away and there are buses operating all around the day to take you to and fro. the academic campus is the same from this year apparently.

3. According to seniors, while there was some discrimination in the first batch, it has reduced if not almost finished. There are no differences in opportunities and both BA and BSc students take part in all the activities equally. also apparently the new vc is pro bsc (?)

4. you have got to think about that.

Hi thankyou for such a detailed explanation although i know you are from a law background but what are your thoughts about the masters in public policy course in nlsiu? Shd i be prioritising other colleges like TISS or shd nlsiu be my priority given that higher academic rigour is my demand from a college and im not as much intrested in getting a “magical campus life”

Your professor should not be calling you uneducated, even though you are in fact in a relationship in which he is supposed to be educating you, not the other way around. It sounds like you went looking to provoke so that you could then malign the professor to everyone. You can't change impulsive professors but if you are interested in learning from them instead of performing politics (even if that is what they are doing), then you can ask questions that come from genuine curiosity, not a desire to make points. You could have asked him how to compare islamic fundamentalism and hindu fundamentalism and why some people blame one while others blame the other. College is not an NDTV debate. You have an opportunity to learn, but no one can force you.

Your professors should not be ridiculing you but we don't know the context. Did you go and try to start debating him without an appointment? What was your tone? Maybe you should think about your own motivations in starting the exchange. A good education changes how you see the world. Sometimes it shows you that you are right about certain things. But if you are afraid of being wrong and want to attack instead of learning, then you will not learn. It is not your job to decide what the professor should or should not do. It is your job to decide whether you can have the kind of conversation that will allow you to learn as much as possible from him.

Manmeet Sir is great. Task master but very good and hands on from what I’ve heard and seen in the team. Not sure about the Junior Partners since I never worked with them. There is no separate team or pool. All the associates work with all partners (Manmeet Sir plus 2 JP). Not sure about the Mumbai Partner and team. I think they work separately on matters with Manmeet Sir.

The earlier comment reflects the position at NLU Delhi 7-8 years ago. Please examine the quality of faculty and coursework at NLSIU and NLU Delhi in the present academic year to get a sense of what things will be like in 2026-2027. On current form, NLSIU is miles ahead when it comes to the depth of instruction, choice of readings and accountability enforced through the assessment cycles. A good barometer is the academic excellence and professional commitment of the teachers who are delivering the core courses for LL.M. students at NLSIU. Our batch had Rahul Hemrajani for Research Methods and Legal Writing, Sidharth Chauhan for Comparative Public Law and Governance followed by Prof. N.S. Nigam for Law & Justice In A Globalising World. Please do your homework and ask current LL.M. students at both institutions.

AI will only make execution easier (at least for the first few decades). The choices and liability will still fall upon humans. And because AI will streamline execution throughout multiple economic sectors and will cut down time to complete a lot of tasks, naturally the sheer volume of economic activity will pile up. In the long run this shall make up for a decent enough job market.

Long story short, even though execution time for completing deals will shorten up the number of deals will increase. Therefore, unemployment due to AI should not be on your bucket list to lose sleep over.

I hope this isn't taken the wrong way, but unfortunately for you, you are not the judge of someone's caliber. The interviewer is, and the ugly truth is that, they might have had something the interviewer was looking for. A lot of people terrible on paper, can be incredibly in real life. There is no telling what works and what doesn't, but there is no point punching below.

That said, while T1s have closed their hiring, there can always be team specific vacancy. If you are from a T1 that allows you to intern during the semester break I would recommend that you reach out to your past partners and request an assessment internship for a longer period, especially since you've mentioned you have performed well.

If the partner is unwilling or unable to accomodate for an assessment internship, you can explain your situation and (if you are on good terms and they are happy with your work) request them to recommend you for vacancies in other teams or even firms.

If you are not on good terms with your partner, or haven't ever interacted with your partner, loop in your college rcc and request them to reach out to the hr and partner. From what I understand a few T1 college rcc already do this.

If you are from one of those T1s that don't let you intern during the semester. Repeat the above but for a placement interview.

I would also recommend applying to tier 2 firms and a lot of boutique firms which are at the top of their game for their specific niche. You can later try for a lateral shift to a tier 1 firm.

All the best!

I am in academia. One of the best advice a now-retired professor gave me was - if your first instinct is to belittle the person asking the question, by perhaps saying something along the lines of - oh, do you not even know this; this is so easy; go read some more before coming to talk to me; among other kinds of dissmive remarks, you are the problem. In such scenarios, it is very likely that you are unclear or cannot explain your position in simple terms, which is your duty and responsibility as a professor. I personally do not know how much this applies to your scenario, but I wanted to share his advice.

She is not preferred by the senior partner. She is being taken advantage of. They are taking advantage of her insecurities and loneliness. They very well know that the other partners who have a social and personal life are more talented and hence less insecure and won’t accept toxicity nor will they spread any toxicity. If she’s very bitter it’s because at some point even she has been treated that way and she doesn’t know how to heal from that trauma.

You've pulled plenty of strings in your life as well, you're just oblivious to them. You are studying in a rather expensive uni most probably funded by your parents. You were doing (unpaid) internships, which too were funded by your parents.You were also provided with the education that enabled you to enter a tier 1 law school, funded by your parents. These are strings you're taking for granted, which most in our country (with a per capital income of 2.5 k usd pa) would die for. Look around, you'll see plenty of kids many of whom could significantly be more talented than you, working odd jobs to feed their families. Privilege is only visible when it's on the other side. So count your blessings, stop being miserable, take accountability for your shortcomings, strive to overcome them, and achieve whatever it is you're striving to achieve. All the best!

First of all, it's shameful that the Hyderabad court passed an ex parte order without hearing Netflix and even more shameful that the High Court lobbed it back to the lower court and it took 5 years for the stay to be lifted. What a JOKE of a legal system.

Coming to the episode, for me two things stand out:

- It basically shows that Hyderabad's rise as an IT capital was based on a complete lie.

- When Sucheta Dalal cals Satyam a "lala company". This expression is repeatedly used on LI to describe certain Indian law firms. Same mentality?

Nuh uhh They haven't banned parents what has been told is " we cannot accommodate parents of all five batches so parents are not allowed HOWEVER parents of GOLD MEDALISTS are certainly Welcome" trust me I wish I was kidding but these are the exact instructions that have been given

Nothing new. Some professors used to be like that during my law school days too. These professors are like normal human beings (some are good and some are bad). You must stay away from bad ones as much as possible. There is no point in arguing or trying to impress these people (unless it is for the sake of grades).

May sound harsh, but you need to hear it:

1. Law is a field of connections. If you have connections and don’t use them, you’d be an idiot. It’s not a field as idealistic as you want it to be. It may seem unfair that someone gets opportunities via connections, but connections are an asset. And you need to know how to leverage your assets in this field. The good part about connections? You can make your own. It doesn’t need to be a parent putting in a good word. Approach people you interned under, college alumni since you’re apparently in a great college, even LinkedIn. Build connections, that’s one of the only sure shot ways to survive in this field.

2. Competence beats everything else. If you’re competent, a team or a firm will make space for you. Sure, you may have great internships on your CV, but ask yourself why the team didn’t hire you despite that. Maybe you didn’t know basics, maybe your work quality wasn’t good enough, maybe the team didn’t see the interest they expected, maybe you didn’t converse with them enough: a million things could have happened which made them feel you weren’t good enough. And this goes beyond grades and college and connections. I know people who started law school 5-6 years after high school and now have jobs in T-1s, people who are known troublemakers in their colleges yet got PPOs from, people who know far lesser stuff than I do yet about a field of law, yet got campus placements. Yk what they all have in common? They’re pretty good at what they do. You can improve on this. Take a sheet of paper and write down the feedback you received from each internship. Maybe even ask anyone you’re still on good terms with in the team you interned at for honest feedback, not the whole we don’t have vacancy stuff. Work on it, and continue trying to get other internships and opportunities. If you’re competent, something will work out for sure. It may not be what you want, but it will be something.

ATB!

Similar situation, but I’m not giving up yet. I’ve done call-backs at good firms and good teams, so even if it’s not going to work out, I’ll keep trying. I’ve reached out to pretty much all SAs/ PAs and Partners I’ve worked under for referrals. Cold emailing Partners on a daily basis. I know that something will work out, just not what yet.

You have two options: first is either keep blaming your college or circumstances (which seems to be what you’re doing.) It’s not good though, as it won’t lead you anywhere. I may not be in a position to say this, but you’ve got to be way tougher than this if you want to survive in this field. Connections and competence aside, law as a field, especially with the rise of AI, needs grit to thrive in and you don’t seem to have that from your post. Maybe you relied too much on your college or maybe you thought things would automatically work out- but they don’t. You have to strive and work to make things happen, sometimes way more than others. It’s unfair, yes, but sometimes inevitable.

Second, you start working to make things happen. Sure, it may not be what you want: maybe you’ll end up in a T-2 or T-3 and grumble, but at least you’ll have something good. Look into options: you have firms, judicial clerkships, in-house opportunities, LLMs. You can do a number of things to survive and make your situation better. The only question is if you’ll do it or not.

Maybe you won’t end up with anything in 2026 either. That’s fine. What’s not fine is not trying.

I'm a fifth year who is currently looking for a PPO or a job in any firm, in GC, disputes, M&A or anything honestly. Location preferred in bangalore but any location is fine. I wanted to know which firms offer clear pathway from internship to PPOs without making the process too cumbersome. Level of the firm does not matter. I know its already really late for a person like me to get PPOs but 5th year is really stressing me out, most of my freinds have jobs or are planning for Master or have family in litigation while im sitting jobless waiting for graduation.

As we draw close to the New Year, I can't help but pity my fate and curse my stars. I'm from the batch of 2026 and few months away from graduation and I don't have a job lined up. This has been worst year and 2026 is likely to be the same. And guess what? I am in a T-1 college one that claims to be premier law school. In any case, can't really blame the college entirely when my luck has not worked. Despite having the grades and the profile and doing well in my internships I could not get any converts. Worst part I have seen people half my caliber and grades/profile getting jobs at T-1 firms . I hate my life and, if God is real I hate them too.

Rant Over. Happy New Year to everyone, but not to those who got where they are because the odds were in their favour or those who got stuff simply because they pulled some strings somewhere.

EDIT requested (see below): To mod: Can you please edit my post to say 2026 will be my breakthrough year and I will find the best opportunity out there. On contemplation and support from the Legally India, I realised that I am being too negative and pessimistic about things. Could you edit my post to thank the community and correct the folly that I committed- putting negativity into universe and expecting good things in return.

OP here.

Thank you for those who have clarified that this response was not warranted.

Would also like to personally respond to this.

Almost every second year associate in any law firm starts understanding what you have shared. However, not everyone has the luxury of not earning after college. No heat to the lucky ones. Happy for them.

I, for example, wasn't as lucky. This job helped me to get my parents' surgeries done (running to around 25 lacs), get my sister married, got myself married, got my house renovate, bought a house.. Now, could I have waited and worked in litigation? Yes, I could have. But my parents couldn't, my sister couldn't.

So I'll reiterate for your ready reference, what are the salary structures expected for 1st year salaried partners?

+1. KCO peeps - stop enforcing CLEs if no one has the time to prepare for one and no one attends one as well. Or make your partners respect nonbillables as well. The whole system is a joke when the policy is enforced at a firm level but at a team level the partner would never let you do non billable BS

Predictable bashing of this man by biased LI readers. FYI it's not his fault if his reform ideas are not accepted. In fact, one of the reasons they face opposition is the fear that Congress and other left-wing parties will take to the streets, burn buses etc. This happened with the farm protests. So YOU lot are to blame.

Nevertheless, at least some reforms have been accepted.

For anyone reading this, just don't do it to yourself. You'll harm your career unless you suck up to the partner or are able to display an innate likeness of airplanes which is totally unnecessary for the actual transactions. Will not give you any real work for the longest time as well. Pay is also shit only 35k and you'll have to practically beg for a 5k increase until you get an auto 5k increase after a year.

Its honestly expected to expect that academia would be left-wing, especially with how bjp and their lot talk about education. That still doesn't justify how smug and idiotic these lefty professors are. I've had alot of great professors with whom I could talk about law/philosophy over and it made me actually understand with their points to an extent. People need to realise that answering questions with smugness and belittling the curious only leads to a wider ideological divide, apparent with both the left and the right in modern politics/academia by extension.

Peace at a clerical job at a clerical firm?No. thank you. I’d rather choose litigation where u make friends, are “independent”. As in not employed under anyone, and are doing some real work instead of sitting in some shiny glass office of a corporate office and doing clerical work

A cautionary note. Do not air dirty laundry on this platform. Many have tried. None have benefited.

▮▮▮.

The lesson is brutally simple. This is India. Truth offers no protection without power. Evidence is meaningless without cover. And the profession operates less like a meritocracy than a cartel. Cross it unprepared, and it will crush you.

Comment 2: The previous one got 'sent' accidentally.

a. Coming to specialisation. It does not matter. If you want to apply for a corporate job, they won't care about your LL.M. Law firms won't hire you because you have a specialisation in corporate law. Unless you are specifically interested in a specialisation, it does not matter.

b. That said, if you end up not clearing your judicial services exam (which remains a possibility). You will use this master's as a gateway to Indian legal academia. Interestingly, Indian legal academia does not consider domestic LLMs to be of much repute (funny, eh?). From what I have realised during your LLMs, you try to convince a professor (who won't be, because they will all know that you will pursue government services after this) to hire you as an RA. Trust me, the entry barriers to this market are much higher than actual monopolies.

c. If you end up getting a job in academia, know this: you will have two papers - bread and butter (that you do for earning a living) and your specialisation (that you do for yourself). A common specialisation, as much as you might want to think otherwise, makes your competition tougher. Advertisements for AP might not mention these specialisations, or you end up competing with so many others who do. So a general LLM works better in the long run.

d. However, a specialisation might actually open a door for a future master's in a good foreign university after a few years of work. I hope this helps.

Bottom LINE: NLUD for you. Don't specialise.

As a former LL.M student from NLU Delhi, who got through NLSIU in the second list (long time back, tho), I can tell you certain things that might have remained true from my time till now.

a. LL.Ms are not considered of primary importance. And, while it has something to do with so many other things (like CLAT LLB being more competitive, etc.), it is primarily because your footprint in the university will be for less than a year.

b. That being said, few universities took good care of their LL.Ms like NLU Delhi took. The undergrads were much more welcoming, integration was not a problem, the public law cohort was led by a solid group of professors like Aparna, Mrinal, Niraj (Kumar), etc., who were awesome. Trust me, the time is so short, you might not end up learning anything at all, but being in that environment, seeing larger-than-life profs was truly inspiring for me (a big reason why I ended up in academia was my experience at NLUD).

c. That said, most good profs have left NLUD and their private or public law isn't as good as it used to be.

d. Coming to your point specifically, let us consider your end goal to be the judicial services (as you mentioned). Will it be efficient to uproot everything (reading hours and hours of bare acts, judgment writing, etc.) and go to Bangalore and then again within the blink of an eye come back to Delhi? Logistically, NLUD makes more sense. They still continue to hold the policy that boys wont be given on campus housing. So that way you are not obliged to stay on campus. You save money.

e. Let us come to what is taught. LLMs, if done right, will seldom teach you your bare acts. It will reach deep down to theory and philosophy of which ever area you wish to specialise in. Knowing the group that teaches in NLSIU, it will be a complete detour from your judiciary goals.

f. I, of course, am taking nothing away from teachers at NLUD. Some in comparative public law will give you a run for your money. However, it will be far more manageable than NLSIU.

Wow that sounds awful, are you sure about this? Why would people choose to work here over other large firms then? I saw that a couple of their senior associates are from indus/argus and rajaram / burgeon etc where work life would be better or not but at least pay would be better

Looking to intern in bombay in the months of either may or June, im a 2nd year, from a t-1 NLU, looking for good firms/lawyers who do IBC in bombay. I have 4 months of internship experience under an AOR majorly dealing with commercial cases, couple of publications, 1 SCOPUS publication under review, and a couple of mooting awards average-ish GPA and CV, any recommendations for the same would be appreciated :)

Is it better to go to a tier 2/3 law firm with work life balance most of the time of the year ( I have heard about a few but need to dig in more) than a reputed inhouse.

I am thinking from perspective of taxation and growth. From what I have gathered based on interactions with my inhouse friends, it's not a paper pushing job especially the ones that pay you 20 + and more. You do research, transactions, brief seniors like any other in dispute team etc. and so on. But 30% tax is a lot, compare to no tax up till 75 lakhs.

Should I therefore switch to some tier 2/3 law firms with good WLB. My worry is that it is difficult to shift to a reputed inhouse at a later stage from a tier 2/3 law firm, than from an existing reputed inhouse brand. Thanks.

Its the place to be right now for a lawyer. They are doing some of the most marquee deals in the market and led by arguably a top 5 corporate lawyer in India. I have been applying to the firm for the last 5 years and still have not gotten an interview call due to the high filtration process they run, and I work at a T1 firm.

Obviously, a Partner is not going to sit and write 3000 words by himself. No one has the time for that. It's going to go to the poor Associates.

Like always, one can expect the Partners to forget about it until 3 days before the deadline, and completely ruin whatever Christmas break the Associates get.

Who even reads this?

In that way, I can ask: how are most lawyers around the world fine with not being academics? Academics (perhaps not too many of them in India, but a significant number abroad) write books, articles and all sorts of things that judges, lawyers and law students, not least legislators and policymakers read when thinking about the law. In addition, academics (both in India and outside) teach the students, shaping young minds and influencing (in the case of the exceptional ones) for the rest of the life how many lawyers think about the law - including the "20l per hearing" kind. So shouldn't even the litigators earn LLMs and PhDs and be expected to produce scholarship publishable by the likes of the Law Quarterly Review, Current Legal Problems, Legal Theory, Cambridge Law Journal, OJLS etc? Wouldn't that compound their impact? Or should they be the kind that set up, or teach on pre-existing, clinical programmes at the universities?

I’m not OP but some people have bills to pay, families to look after and dreams to fulfil which are slightly more important than ‘shaping the law’ decades down the road. No doubt litigation is a more suited profession for advocacy but not everyone is privileged enough to start and continue with peanuts for years on, so ‘clerical’ work is not the biggest tradeoff if it allows you to live your life better.

Slow week so I have a lot of time to reflect on things I wish I knew when I was an A0 - A2, buried in diligence, SPAs and SSAs.

To the young crop of ambitious final year law students and junior associates: you are not compensated for brilliance; you are compensated for Availability.

### 1. The Compensation Cap is Real and Low

You have entered the highest-paying legal segment in India, and yet:

- The highest starting pay for a graduate lawyer in India (even at T-1, Corporate, Big City, <20 LPA) is less than what Investment Bankers and top Software Engineers from top colleges start with.
- Achieving a few Cr/annum income the standard for successful business folks in Delhi/Mumbai/Bangalore is a pipe dream for most lawyers.

### 2. The Partner’s Job is Sales, Not Law

Partners are glorified salespeople running a service desk. Their entire job is a ruthless balancing act:

- - Client's insane hours expectations.
- - Insane turnaround times.
- - Constantly cost-cutting so the deal doesn't move to SAM, AZB, Trilegal, JSA over a few lakh difference.
- Your expertise is a commodity in this system.

###

### 3. Your Expertise is Generic

After 4-5 years in "sophisticated" deal work, you are not an expert in anything genuinely proprietary. The work is so generic that your true, portable skillset is limited to:

- - Work ethic (ability to pull all nighters and work weekends without boundaries).
- - Document management (administration which is simply handled by good software in most global corporates).
- Not a specialized, high-value practice that clients can't get elsewhere for less.

###

### 4. The In-House Pivot is a Concession, Not a Gain

Taking a pay-cut for an in-house role is the de facto escape route, but we need to call it what it is: a significant surrender of earning potential without the equity, perks, or real work-life balance enjoyed by in-house counsel abroad.

###

### 5. The Golden Handcuffs are tighter in expensive cities like Mumbai

Look around at the SAs, PAs, and Counsel who stay past the point of no return:

- They are either Mumbai-based locals who don't bear the full brunt of rent and have a family support system.
- Or they are settled with spouse/kids and are entirely dependent on the firm's consistent paycheck. They cannot afford a sabbatical, a pivot, or the freedom to explore a better life elsewhere. This is why they stay.

---

-

My Advice to the A0s and A1s:
-----------------------------

Work Intentionally From Day One. Your goal is not partnership; your goal is optionality.

- Assess what portable skills (e.g., specific regulatory knowledge, commercial negotiation) you are gaining that can be applied outside the firm.
- The sacrifice (health, family, sleep, hobbies) only makes sense if it rapidly accelerates you to a position of financial independence and career choice, not just a slightly bigger bonus.

I am responding on good faith basis even though this is probably ragebait.

The percentage of people who choose litigation and become successful like that is far, far lower than the percentage of people who choose law firms and make partner. Moreover, the lit people either undergo a lot of hardship financially to begin with or else have a privileged background. People joining good law firms can start earning decently from day one and also support their families. These are all good enough reasons to choose one over the other. However, your adulation of one group is also over the board. Very few lawyers do anything consciously to 'shape' the law, most of them are trying to represent their clients to the best of their ability and cater to their needs and wants, that's all. A good professional can do well in both. Neither should ideally go after 'fame' or headlines, that's not the role of a lawyer.

The honest answer is - you do you. Not everyone want the same thing. And money after a point of time doesn't matter. Shaping the law in a court can be exciting for you, boring for someone. Similarly, working on a tax opinion or trail of documents of ownership for a property may be exciting for someone, boring for you. So, it would always differ. Not sure if this would give an answer to your query, but this is my philosophy.

I can share this because this because happened in private outside class. This ▮▮▮ professor has a habit of blaming India for the Kashmir problem and rants against “Hindu fundamentalism”. I met him outside class and asked him whether he felt Islamic fundamentalism was blameless. I made the point that jihadis in Kashmir are brainwashed at madrassas run by the likes of Hafiz Sayeed and taught to hate non-Muslims. I said that the same problem is now being manifested in Bangladesh. He smirked at me and said that I don’t have a basic understanding of history and I am “uneducated”. He said I should go to a library and read basic history before speaking to him. He said I was “parroting BJP talking points”.

It’s disgusting that professors have such intolerance towards students who disagree with their viewpoint and who are not their groupies.

Aviva completed her schooling at Delhi’s prestigious Modern School. She went on to study Media Communication and Journalism at OP Jindal Global University. According to her Instagram bio, she works as a photographer and producer, using her creative work to highlight social issues and promote positive change. She has presented her work at several notable exhibitions in recent years, including ‘You Cannot Miss This’ at the India Art Fair in 2023 and ‘The Illusory World’ in 2019.

She is also a co-founder of a creative/photography production unit called Atelier 11. Beyond her artistic pursuits, Aviva is also a former national-level football player.

https://www.news18.com/india/priyanka-gandhis-son-raihan-vadra-gets-engaged-to-girlfriend-aviva-report-ws-l-9799413.html

Congratulations!! 🤗💐❤️ And it means that if Raihan lives up to the family tradition, a Jindal grad could be the future First Lady! 😍