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. All of the academics on the SRC are much more senior than Sudhir. We discuss ad nauseam on this platform (which pretty much has a foot in the grave and several toes of the other one in as well) that Sudhir got a leg up thanks to MP Singh. Ever thought that even if he was a 'friend' of theirs, they might look upon him as someone promoted before his time, and not be influenced by him because of that? You have to remember that these guys, smart as they are, are Harvard/Oxford people, in unis filled with Harvard/Oxford qualified people, so no MP Singh-style favours for them. In their own countries, they have had to go through the same process of climbing the regular ladder, rung-by-rung, which Sudhir would have had to go through as well, if he had chosen to remain in the UK, and even in India, if fortune wasn't kind enough to send along MP Singh, who was smart enough to spot his potential. Also, have you thought that they may not know him very well? He doesn't live (or work) in England or the U.S. full time, remember? So there's your rebuttal to the 'friends of Sudhir' point.
2. They might, just, be independent and not influenced by anything other than their own observations and the mandate they have been given (including any fear of a backlash from Sudhir)? Also, in case you have forgotten, Sudhir/NLSIU promised that the SRC findings would be published openly this time. A nice, cranky little fool he'd look, crying about a commission he himself supported! Come on guys, get a life! Sudhir may not be a perfect administrator, but he is also far from the blithering idiot you make him out to be, so please stop trying to paint a picture you know is impossible to paint.
3. Finally, in case you have forgotten, he praises the western universities (his PR about NLSIU not withstanding). I remember this thread where folks were making fun of him for saying that universities should stick to 'fundamental first principles'. Surely, he'd look a bit foolish if he said random stuff about westerners being 'jealous' of NLSIU, when he is making the very same point that western academics (especially British ones) make all the time in response to any criticism that their law curriculums are too theoretical.
All of those people need to be paid- they need students to teach. they need research centres that will make them come to nls. Taking an institution building perspective is hard when you feel like a lot is changing and youre not sure if the only thing you had going for you was the selectivity of the institution. But the institution will be better off for these changes in 5 years time, and would have lost its relevance if this stuff hadnt happened. venkat rao was bad for the institution, its reputation, the capabilities of its graduates- had all slipped.
1. 3 year LLB was no need in NLS. Why started in NLS which wasset up for 5 year law only?
2.ballb seat increase from 80 to 300 seat is horrible decision.
Batch size could be increased but that should not be done at such a rapid pace. He could have kept the batch size at 120 for 5 years then expanded it to 180. This way, quality of education would not have suffered so much. In the name of expanding and renovating the library, he has turned it into a cafe with sofas all around and hardly any fans. It's very difficult to study without a fan during the summer and unfortunately, the majority of the library does not have a fan, forget of AC.
Right now, he has closed down majority of the common spaces and the peace or learning environment is suffering to a large extent.