https://bestcolleges.indiatoday.in/rankings/law

https://bestcolleges.indiatoday.in/news-detail/law-courting-distinction

Sudhir says that he aims to recruit 125 faculty members and have a 1:15 teacher: student ratio. This is a complete carbon copy of the Jindal model and it’s now absolutely clear that Sudhir is aiming to hack into QS through this tactic and get a decent ranking, like Jindal.

The other way in which he is emulating Jindal is in offering courses on AI. He says that there are 10 courses on AI being offered. Frankly, this seems a bit much and I hope that it’s not just a gimmick.

He also points out that NLSIU has produced 25 Rhodes scholars (though he left out the record of the past 8 years 😂).

To be fair to Sudhir, his job is to market NLSU and he’s doing it very well. Just like Rajkumar markets Jindal very well.

Meanwhile, here is the ranking this year:

1. NLSIU2. NUJS

3. GNLU

4. NLIU

5. HNLU

6. Symbiosis Pune

7. NLUO

8. RMLNLU

9. NUALS

10. Lloyd

The obvious question to ask is whether Nalsar, NLUD, NLUJ and Jindal participated. I’m guessing no, as a proper top 10 would include these 4.

A true ranking would be as follows (giving equal weightage to faculty + campus and hostel infra + admin support + student exchange opportunities + graduate outcomes, i.e. law firm placements, UPSC and higher studies)

1. NLSIU

2. NLUD

3. NALSAR

4. JGLS

5. GNLU

6. NUJS

7. NLUJ

8. NLIU

9. RGNUL

10. RMLNLU

I just don't understand why people include JGLS in the top ranks. Their placements are horrible, the student quality is even worse, and they're located in some random village. I would seriously request you all to not hype JGLS, there are many middle-class kids here who just might make a wrong decision based on your opinions.

As many number of JGLS students get placed in T1 firms as a couple of top NLUs combined. Of course, their total student strength is huge, which is why the percentage is low. However, absolute number-wise, their placement scene is not bad at all. How would middle class students afford JGLS anyway?

In all the parameters you mentioned, barring campus and infra, NUJS is and has always been ahead of GNLU. Hence in no ranking does GNLU get to be ahead of NUJS. Similarly, in all of these parameters, Jindal is currently ahead of all NLUs. Jindal's drawbacks include huge fees and quality peer group, which factors do not feature in your parameters anyway. Hence Jindal cannot be behind places like NLUD or NALSAR anyway if you stick to only your mentioned parameters.

Is UPSC a metric to rank AIIMS? You must be dumb. Alos you must be a NLU D student judging how you placed it at second. NLUD students should take a cue from the number of downvotes to every comment where they think they are number 2 or even number 1. You are not better than NLS or NALSAR in any metrics.

Very disappointed with Sudhir. No doubt AI is important, but he seems to be jumping on a bandwagon. He was the one lecturing people about 'fundamental first principles' a few months ago, and now what's he doing himself? I would have thought a strong grasp of the 'fundamental first principles' of law is even more important now than it ever was before? Is not some of this stuff he's doing 'a shallow version of craft'? Saying this as someone who openly confessed on Legally India before to being a 'card carrying Sudhir fanboy'.

At the end of the day, the guy is a uni admin, and he needs his uni's ranking to be at the top. If that involves jumping on bandwagons, he'll jump on bandwagons, unfortunately. Even more unfortunately, however, his own words indicate that he hasn't jumped on the right one here. 'The world's best universities', he says, correctly as it happens, 'don't teach their students a shallow version of craft. They teach fundamental first principles'.

I think what he forgot is that they (usually (see King's College London's professional gutting of many of its non-commercial law module offerings and the exit of many of its law school-based criminology researchers, 2013 - 2014, as an example of an exception that proves the rule)) maintain a balance between jumping on a bandwagon and playing to their traditional strengths (teaching fundamental first principles), and, when jumping on bandwagons, they usually identify the right ones to jump on. Sudhir has done neither here. Sadly, I have now come around to the view that (what I like to call) 'the side of his brain that makes NLAT-type decisions' has become more prominent, and we are going to see the consequences of that in the next few years (if I'm not wrong, 2024 - 29).

i mean. I see what you mean? but its also a fairly short interview. Its pretty possible that sudhir stressed that stuff in the interview but that got cut and editors chose to retain the shiny new AI stuff because thats what editors at places like India today do. I havent seen much from him in terms of action that suggests hes jumping on a bandwagon.

NLS has a couple of projects where theyre using AI but nothing enough to talk up to a national magazine so much.

Very interesting comments from Sudhir on AI. All this pro-AI stance is genuinely amusing considering that he changed the traditional term paper system out of AI fear-mongering, instead of setting up guidelines for its use. To this date, the University has not taught its students how to use AI responsibly (hat tip to some profs who have allowed students to use AI provided declarations are made, but these professors are a handful). Lol to his comments on how NLS students know how to use AI. If students do know it, it's out of our own interest.

The University’s commitment to AI is also seen in how students who were interning with the Meta project at NLS were told that these are not recognized internships xD

Very unclear too how we have been offered "over ten courses on AI" in the last 3 years. I recall an elective on this being offered only in the last trimester. Maybe Indiatoday should do a more in-depth profile?