Read 11 comments as:
Filter By
I've always been a paranoid about less meritorious candidates selected above the meritorious ones. Keeping this aside, I was intrigued that how well do they perform despite not being able to write the CLAT as good as the other batchmates?
Even I have a domicile for an NLU but I'm only inclined to take it because of exhaustion of options, I would take zero pride in getting that seat. Contrastingly, I would rather be ashamed of it.
Is the difference between them blatantly visible or it doesn't even feel there is a gap?
The hard truth is that merit seat candidates do far better then SC/ST/OBC candidates, but the situation with domicile or NRI candidates is more complicated. With SC/ST/OBC candidates the reason are twofold. One is that you need to have a high level of English to do well in law school, reading stuff ranging from Dworkin to US judgements. This is often not the case with such candidates, because they did not go to elite schools.The other reason is that some of these candidates are simply not bright enough to succeed in top colleges, competing with the top students of the country. It’s like forcing Ranji trophy calibre batsmen to face top international bowlers.

With NRI and domicile quota students, those from elite schools and high levels of English tend to do reasonably well, in some cases even better than merit seats students. Also, some of them may be Nepo kids with access to good internships, which helps them improve their grasp of law. But there also a large number of week students who do very badly.
Every time I see/hear the phrase 'merit seat candidates', I start laughing. People who don't realize that merit isn't proven by relying on your parents to afford a good education and all the right privileges for you since childhood, have never been meritorious in any way that counts.
You don't know what you're talking about, the fact that the merit is inherent is correct but what are you trying to prove?
The only scale that could measure a candidate's reading speed, comprehension, composure and knowledge is a exam, and excelling at it makes one a meritorious candidate despite the fact that his merit is inherited from privilege.
Your argument is flawed.
Not really. To compare two people's merit, you need to give both of them the same level of training first. The fact that you don't understand that merely means that your notion of merit is flawed. By no means merit is determined by how quickly I can read a comprehension.
first year kid writing about it? 5 years is a huge to make and break your career.
It's doesn't matter how you get in. What matters is what you do after getting in. You will find people at both ends of the spectrum be it reserved or unreserved.
It would help if you read about "Substantive Equality". Recently in Neil Aurelio Nunes, Justice D.Y. Chandrachud spoke a lot about merit and reservation. Suffice to say, You can dispel most of your preconceived notions about merit being only the sole factor by reading the judgement itself. I would also commend the comments of fellow LI readers, I agree with them that what you do in Law school for 5 years matters. 5 years can transform a person, it is all about willpower and sheer dedication to be a better version of yourself. Now it might sound a bit controversial given the economic sense to it "If you are born poor, then it is not your fault but if you die poor, then it is your fault".
EH. this is all nonsense. people change and grow and five years in a university setting is plenty of time to change and grow. not that CLAT is some perfect exam anyway- its not even an okay exam most days. people who topped my batch came in through reserved categories/ domicile categories. People who came in through reservations have gone on to have fantastic successful careers because they worked hard. TBH this whole thing of "more meritorious people didn't get in because of you" thing is old. Guess what? more meritorious GC candidates did get in. you didn't. that doesn't entitle you to steal from people who have been oppressed for millennia. The only time you should look in your neighbours bowl is to make sure they have enough. So work harder and stop dragging kids who face oppression in addition to studying and doing well in competitive exams.
The reservations for the SC/ST candidates are definitely necessary. There are historical injustices involved and merit has a much wider connotation than what you’re presently understanding. I think going to a law school and learning the true import of the Right to Equality would open your eyes to that necessity. India remains a deeply unequal society despite the progress. There are students from those categories who perform quite well in law school. CLAT is only an objective test which is quite one dimensional in nature.

With respect to OBC and EWS, I think the targeting of Creamy Layer is very poor and is mainly done for vote-bank reasons than real upliftment. Look at the CLAT merit list, there are so many such candidates in the top 200 ranks. I doubt such relatively high ranks would be possible if they were truly backward. But then again, if socio-economic backwardness is properly implemented, then such a reservation may help.

I think the real issue is with NRI and domicile quotas. Atleast the NRI students pay the extra fees and I can sympathise with them because the high percentage of reservations take away many opportunities if one has a bad day in CLAT. If you have the money, then you ought to use it and having the option is a good backup for some top NLUs.

My real gripe is with the domicile quota. Not only are most such students not suffering from any form of backwardness but they pay the same fees and it’s based on the accident of place of birth and where your parents reside. I’m sure everyone would move to Karnataka if they could land a seat in NLS a little easier. There is, in my opinion, no merit in that seat whatsoever. The students may still be smart kids but the manner in which you enter a NLU matters. The end cannot justify the means. If I was getting even a seat at NLS on domicile, I would rather stick with the NLU I got on merit. But then again, young students will have other considerations like staying closer to home, ease of getting jobs etc.
A 14-word comment posted 1 year ago was not published.