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?
1. Dr Gitanjali Ghosh for International Law
2. Dr Chiradeep Basak for Environmental Law
Both of ‘em are very popular here..
Raag just wrote this festschrift-esque review of Raz. The intellectual calibre it takes to engage with jurisprudence of this nature is very high. How can you dismiss young scholars of such output like this?
So you can basically come to a completely unfair and wrong conclusion on the output of legal scholars in India simply by using a wrong metric such as google scholar.
Batch 2017 Nalsar - Rank 1 (13 gold medals), then BCL Oxford
Also holds industry experience at SAM and ITC.
Excellent teaching skills (teaches International law as of now)
Currently is presenting a paper in the Netherlands on the same subject.
Bright future, indeed.
Citations and H index is only one way to measure impact. Think also about what the piece does. To scholarship and the world. Anup’s scholarship changed things. It’s taught material in most law universities in india and students everywhere have name recognition. It’s adding to scholarship in a way that hadn’t been done previously for years and years.
That’s the point.
At the stage they are in for their career and their chosen field- these people are mostly doing just fine. Instead of doing this armchair criticism on the internet it might be better to go and work on our own research.
Swati Parmar 4 --> 0
b) I didn't show you merely who writes how much, but who gets cited how much. This part should take care of your inane argument a 100 rubbish pieces to one impactful one. Most of these stars are not making an impact (on their peers/ in their field). Some, however, aren't even writing enough to begin making an impact.
Anyone who doesn't think Anup isnt a good scholar because he "only " put together one project or only has that many publications is kidding themselves. Anups work is painstaking and difficult and perhaps one of the only legal projects coming out of NLUS that is equal parts rigorous empirical research and equal parts making actual changes in peoples lives. project 39A actually litigates and represents people in prisons. they actually work with state governments to try and move the needle not just on death penalty but also legal aid and prison conditions and things like that. He has clearly done something remarkable with this thing, and if you cant recognise its value because its only one project and not scholarly enough- then that says more about you than about them.
footprint as a scholar has to mean more than how many citations you have. it also means what actually changed because of your work. How many people have read it.
Below you have a list of the scholars mentioned by others in increasing order of activity/strength of scholarship. I have only kept people based in India in my list as I don't see those based abroad changing jack-shit in our country. If and when they return we can start hero worshiping them.
There were three who I couldn't even find mentioned on Google Scholar. Ab bhai yeh kyaa scholarship badal rahe hain mujhe nahin malum. Inhe Google bhi scholar nahi maanta!
1. Pranav Verma [not found]
2. Niharika Salar [not found]
3. Uday Sanker [not found]
Next up are those who have produced more scholarship (in numbers) than they have been found worthy of a citation by their peers. Inhe inke peers scholar nahi maante!
4. Adithya Variath 7 --> 0
5. Raag Yadava 3 --> 1
6. Kunal Ambasta 7 --> 3
7. Aakanksha Kumar 7 --> 4
8. Sidharth Chauhan 16 --> 6
9. Atul Alexander 67 --> 10
In light of this, I would submit that we should stop counting those mentioned till now in these lists of super stars. They have a ton to prove to academia. All they have as of now is a small coterie of followers at their respective law school and nothing much more.
Then next up woh hain jinka data set is too small for her to be currently taken seriously as a scholar.
10. Sahana Ramesh 1 --> 6
Another one we should remove from conversations is a guy who has admittedly pulled together one good research project. However, even he has a minimal footprint as a scholar.
11. Anup Surendranath 13 --> 20
I would put the below mentioned three in a category of people who we can look at seriously as their peers seem to do so as well.
12. Aparna Chandra 26 --> 54**
13. Shouvik Kumar Guha 79 --> 67*
14. Prabhash Ranjan 140 --> 454
* His Google Scholar page is misconfigured by AI and seems to have some hits from another scholar by the same name. For instance, I am pretty sure he did not write the paper on lasers in 1972. You can take that 67 with a pinch of salt.
** Counted to the best of my ability as she hasn't certified her Google Scholar page to make for an easy count.
1. Atul Alexander
1. Raag Yadava
2. Kunal Ambasta
3. Sahana Ramesh
At NALSAR:
1. Sidharth Chauhan
2. Pranav Verma
3. Niharika Salar
At Oxford:
1. Shreya Aatrey
2. Ayushi Aruna Agarwal
At Cambridge:
1. Aradhya Sethia
2. Dr. Prabhash Ranjan, Jindal Law School
3. Dr. Aparna Chandra, NLSIU