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?
Please don't demotivate, give genuine response! I'm requesting!
"He was the son of a lawyer, often born into a family where the practice of law had been a tradition for generations. He was a Hindu and, more likely than not, a brahmin. He was born in an urban area into a wealthy or upper middle-class family. He received both his baccalaureate and law degrees in India. He was a high achiever, often the recipient of prestigious academic awards. He began his professional career at age twenty-four when he commenced the practice law before the high court of his home state. He may have been among the two dozen who was active in politics during these years. Twenty-two years later, after having reached the front rank of the bar of his high court, he was appointed to that court. A dozen years later, by which time he was very senior, usually its chief justice, he was appointed to the SCI. It was his seniority that raised him to the recruitment plateau, but to get to the SCI, he usually needed to be from a particular high court or geographic region. He was no younger than fifty-one and no older than sixty-two. He may have met the usual criteria of merit—integrity, professional competence, incorruptibility, and neutrality towards litigants—but was not selected for that reason. His religion, seniority, state and region of origin, among other considerations, were more weighty than merit as traditionally defined. He was 58.5 years of age when he arrived in Delhi and served for six and a half years until mandatory retirement forced his departure at age sixty-five. He remained active after leaving the bench. Serving on officially appointed commissions or tribunals and chamber practice were the most common post-retirement activities. He died when he was on the threshold of his eightieth year."