We want LI to be one of the friendliest places on the internet, where lawyers and law students help each other with their career related queries and occasionally discuss other stuff that might affect their lives too. In other words:
1. Be kind, respectful and helpful to each other.
2. Be bona fide, truthful, genuine and curious.
3. Assume the best intention of others.
Therefore, in using the site, you must agree to do your best to uphold these community guidelines.
Note that what you find here is written and moderated by anonymous people on the internet.
Therefore everything you read here is very likely unverified, rumour, speculation and/or downright false.
In continuing to read anything here, you must therefore agree not to take anything you read here as factual and that you will exercise due caution, diligence and common sense before acting on any information you may come across here.
You also agree to report any inaccurate or malicious comments with the buttons. Moderators take action within 24 hours, as required and appropriate under law.
Our full terms and conditions apply too.
Do you solemnly agree to all of the above?
2. You equate "market success" with "educational success". That’s a dangerous collapse of categories. Recruitment patterns often reflect brand value and signaling rather than the intrinsic quality of education. Employers go to certain campuses because of a reputation built in the early years, and because of a filtering mechanism (the CLAT exam) that concentrates students with certain abilities. That doesn’t automatically prove that the pedagogy is robust or that it prepares students equally for practice, litigation, or service to the wider legal system.
And sure, perhaps the NLUs are the "best" the market offers right now. But is that it? Does the role of a university stop the moment its graduates find jobs? If employability is the only yardstick, then the institutes that train plumbers, electricians, and technicians deserve the same prestige as a university-after all, their students also go straight into work. We don’t treat them the same because we expect something more from a university: not just producing employees, but also advancing knowledge, driving innovation, and cultivating responsibility.
If anything, the heavy reliance on “market validation” makes the NLUs complacent—they cater to a narrow band of elite employers while ignoring the wider needs of society, polity, and economy. A good university produces employees. A great university produces, amongst other things, thought leaders.
3. You suggest that one’s quality of education is independent of the positions one takes. That is true at the level of abstract principle. But education is not value neutral. A legal education that trains students in critical thinking, justice oriented reasoning, and awareness of law’s social role cannot be wholly divorced from real world crises. If students can be fluent in Dworkin and ICL but collectively indifferent to an unfolding genocide, then yes, that raises questions about how deeply that education has shaped their intellectual and ethical outlook. It is not about enforcing ideological dogma, it is about whether education has given one the courage and clarity to connect law with lived human realities.
The example of UKLFI does not help your case. The point isn’t whether their members are "top-notch lawyers" in technical skill. The point is that law, divorced from ethical engagement, becomes technocratic at best and complicit at worst. You cannot brush that aside by saying education is just about "playing with ideas". That Wildean quip is useful, but ideas are not merely toys - they have consequences in the real world.
And by the way, this whole idea that education should cultivate not just cleverness but also responsibility? That’s not exactly radical. Max Weber was spelling it out over a hundred years ago in Politics as a Vocation with his ethic of responsibility. So forgive me if I don’t see "play with ideas" as the high-water mark of legal education.
And let’s be honest: if the benchmark is whether students are learning to "play with ideas", then NLUs have already failed the test. There is a genocide unfolding right now, and across the NLUs there has been complete radio silence. Forget about "playing with ideas", nobody even thought it worthwhile to issue a minimal statement. That silence tells us more about the depth of their education than any Wilde quote ever could.
Mr. Gaurav Agrawal
For reference see this :
https://vishallegalghy.blogspot.com/2025/09/reservation-in-government-jobs-effect.html
Non Gown
Band 1- Gaurav Mitra, Sumesh Dhawan
Band 2- GP Madan, Abhishek Anand, Saurav Kalia, Vipul Ganda
Band 3- Tishampati Sen, Gaurav Sethi, Eshna Kumar, Anuj Tewari, Palash Sanghai
Band 2 &3 are filing counsels also.
Secondly, it was also mentioned that the law students will be relocated to IIMR's Gurgaon campus. That never fructified.
I would not trust IIM Rohtak at all.
Secondly, a huge applause to all who have secured positions, be it at a Tier I law firm or a boutique practice. You’ve made it. Every late night, every sacrifice, every ounce of effort is now bearing fruit. The salary figures may excite you for a while, but sooner or later, what you’ll truly value is peace of mind. Remember, you’ve earned your place.
Lastly, to those who couldn’t, please don’t let the pressure consume you. This is not the end of the road. Trust the process. Limit your time on social media as it adds unnecessary stress. Instead, take up courses which will beneficial, reach out to seniors, seek referrals, and most importantly, keep investing in yourself. Progress may feel slow, but it’s still progress.
I share this not as advice, but as something I’ve lived through. The journey is tough, but so are you. Keep hustling the right opportunity will find you. Enjoy the process, and never ever lose your hopes. Remember that you are worthy.
Cheers!!!!
QMUL will take you if you can pay, the application is free
You don't need to know anything prior apart from this. Make sure to go through some good SEBI AO or WTM Orders to get an idea as to how these proceedings are conducted and also look out for some landmark SAT Judgements. That's it. You are all set for the Job/Internship.
Reach out to your alumni network, join as an A0 (market is never bad for good resources / associates) - take whichever team you get and slog it out for a few years. Top 3 NLUs have strong and helpful alumni.
It's really saddening that people can be so obnoxious towards their only job - HIRING.
I really do not understand the motive behind such acts. Is this creating a fake hype or is it just to show the world that look we are still relevant in the market.
Anything else required?
Sapil Kibal
This is a gated profession, the fact that you can practice in the first place along side them is a "privilege" according to them.
Any help will be appreciated.
A partner at a rival firm in their "FRP practice" is a former TLP associate, and he became a partner in 10 years, no discounting of experience or anything.
Rana Ayyub posted a link to the said article on Twitter stating that the article was a “hitjob”.
Arora replied to Ayyub’s tweet, “The man has been accused of rape, he routinely engages in hate speech”.
This tweet was liked by Rawat.
Iyer-Mitra argued that Rawat’s liking of the defamatory tweet means that the same could be read by anybody who perused her Twitter profile. He said that the allegations made in the “defamatory tweet were false and frivolous and were of such nature that they would lower his reputation in the eyes of the right-thinking people”.
Arora and Iyer-Mitra settled the matter and Arora published an apology on his Twitter profile as well.
While deciding the case with respect to Rawat, the Court held that liking the tweet made it available on Rawat’s profile and thus the same constitutes republication.
...
Advocate Raghav Awasthi appeared for Abhijit Iyer-Mitra.
https://www.barandbench.com/news/delhi-court-orders-ndtvs-gargi-rawat-to-pay-10000-to-abhijit-iyer-mitra-for-liking-a-defamatory-tweet
2. Offices of newly designated seniors still do drafting, only that the filings aren't in the name of the senior.
And also how do I cold email, does it work? I don't even know what it means 😭
Your help would be very much appreciated.
I have experience of such applications and have finished very recently an LLM at one of the unis you mentioned. Regarding your consultancy question, I'll quickly address that here, as the answer to that is obvious in my view. Obviously you should be writing it on your own and shouldn't be getting a consultancy to do it for you, because that is unethical and could likely result in your application being invalidated (and even if you did you'd be behaving in a very foolish way, because the standard of such organisations is so poor that it is safe to assume guilt on the charge of being crap on part of a particular organisation without needing proof of anything to the contrary). Should you write on your own but get feedback? Naturally. But again, not from consultancies. Usually, a professor or alumni from your undergrad uni network would be best placed to help you but as that seems to be unavailable to you, I am happy to step in. I will, of course, not write anything for you. However, I am happy to talk you through any ideas you may have and to look over something like a draft if you have one ready to hand.
PS: Do respond here if you choose to write to the email address listed above. I check it rarely and therefore, may involuntarily delay in responding if not prompted to do so.
It’s plainly obvious that NLSIU alumni are preferred by the Congress for judgeships, law officer posts etc. Above all the ideological commonality between NLSIU alumni and the Congress: secularism and left-liberalism unite both. Rahul has also visited NLSIU and Prof Mohan Gopal was one of his close advisors.
So it’s obvious that NLSIU will be in prime position to dominate law officer appointments and judicial appointments. But who all? Gopal? Menaka? Sondhi? Are they are our future AG and SG?
Mine is 20 LPA fixed + 3.5 bonus.
Don't worry too much about it, in a year or so it all evens out - think about the brand name first
M&A | Mumbai
Is there a way I can move to a decent firm or chamber for litigation without significantly discounting my experience?
Also, is it true that the best time to switch from in-house to a firm is around 3–4 PQE? Should I wait until then?
If yes, then the culture out there is not conducive. Leave that place.
There are lots of other opportunities for you. A2 hiring is going on currently all over the place. Find them and move out.
How long after going independent did you get your first brief?
Isn't anything now that he isn't.
Even 70 years into practice will not be enough to learn all court crafts. When you go independent, you are basically someone who has been given a driver's license and trusted enough by their parents to drive. You may/may not know how to navigate the roads and drive properly. You become better with age, like wine. But you'll learn the basic court crafts, allowing you to be independent (and in the more real sense, you don't need your senior to get clients {and not money, since client/work gets you money}, and hence, you get the confidence that you can go independent)
Obviously, dirtying a shared place is not cool, but placing all the weed smokers in a single bucket, and categorising them as "degenerate junkies" speaks volumes about you.
So many of my friends (Me included) have smoked a lot of pot in our personal space, and are doing fairly well for ourselves (Hell, I feel half the people in my floor (Tier 1 Law Firm) smoke/smoked weed in their life. )
At the end of the day, it's a personal choice. You do you. Not that it matters, since your placements should be effortless considering you're competing with "degenerate junkies"
Reimbursement of food is quite subjective, i would say. If the client is stingy, your partner would not allow reimbursements.
Regards,
A guy who rejected the top 3.
GSN:“Lordship, as we all know, the pioneer of our Constitution is Dr. B. R. Ambedkar…”
Before he can move further, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta (TM) cuts in—correcting not the argument, but the very name.
TM:“OR It is Mr. Gopal Sankaranarayan..”
To this, GSN—never one to miss an opportunity for wit—shoots back with a grin:
GSN:“Or perhaps… Mr. Rahul Gandhi?”
For a moment, the entire courtroom freezes. A pin-drop silence. Judges exchange glances. The gallery shifts in unease. The remark lands like a thunderclap—bold, cheeky, and completely unexpected in a case of such national importance.
Now, the real question is—does making such a daring quip in the middle of a high-profile constitutional battle not affect the mood, gravity, or even perception of the proceedings? Or is this just GSN’s trademark flair, pushing the boundaries of courtroom rhetoric?
And let’s not forget the subtext—there seems to be an undercurrent, a silent duel, between GSN and TM. After all, Tushar Mehta rarely interrupts anyone—but the moment GSN takes the podium, the correction comes. Coincidence? Or a subtle power play?
Does anyone here have inside scoop on this courtroom drama?
What about the more elite sections in other colleges? We saw some of it in Kolkata, when the girl student was raped in a medical colllege, but they were peaceful candlelight protests.
I doubt any of these successful managing partners or senior lawyers were people who woke up to their bongs and spent the rest of the day lazing around and continuing to smoke.
Nikhil is a young partner and has much to learn but on balance, is a good leader. He will go places (now watch some cuckoo kid rip apart this line because they don't understand the meaning)!