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?
You should focus on the track record of people instead of their pedigree otherwise you are no better than the so-called TLC lobby.
Leaving jokes aside, most senior academics in India fail to understand the fact that one faculty shouldn't be made to teach too many courses together, that they need time off for quality research, and that there is something called specialisations. That usually require greater faculty number. People with an NLU background, foreign exposure etc. might appreciate that more readily. Which is not saying that nobody from TLC colleges can realise that at all.
A term invented by few morons to make them feel special
Academia is primarily about research output something which a lot of students here simply don't understand. Just search your Prof name on Google Scholar and see how many papers they have come up with, also look at their 'cited in' score to see how much others academics have relied upon them. Papers on SSRN don't really count for much, nor do the downloads on SSRN matter much. I am all for open access, but the industry perception is that peer-reviewed journals published by the likes of Wiley and Springer carry more weight. There is a reason when Tarunabh and Arun started Indian Law Review it was done under the aegis of Taylor & Francis.
So, going back to your comment, even Sudhir with all his pull just attracted a bunch of star Prof already working at other Indian universities. Nobody from outside India has come back to join NLS. Even in India, it will be difficult for the likes of Sudhir to poach talent from better-funded universities such as the SAU. In that sense, in recent times, Raj Kumar at JGLS and Ranbir Singh at NLUD have been much more accomplished.
Kumar has certain advantages over Singh and Krishnaswamy but then again he was able to snatch Stephen Marks, a distinguished Prof with tenure at Harvard and that is not something that you can just do on basis of money. For Singh, I consider him to a better administrator because he was able to navigate government channels exponentially better than Sudhir, and two he did not have Sudhir's advantage of having camaraderie with the candidates he intended to hire but still was able to attract top talent. Interestingly, neither Kumar nor Singh are the product of a NLU.
Yes, he can be curt and not polite to everyone, but thats the trade-off. And a worthwhile tradeoff at that.