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?
Young lawyers should prefer to argue in HC and District Courts or start career as filing lawyer in SC ?
Debate open
You cannot "start your career as filing lawyer in SC". Being an AOR requires at least 5 years' experience. Secondly, an AOR is not supposed to be a mere rubber-stamp. Unfortunately, there are some into such practice, but that practice is frankly looked down upon.
You can still argue in whichever forum, so why your question assumes a dichotomy between arguing in HC/District Courts or simply filing in SC is beyond my comprehension. These things are not mutually exclusive. And you also miss out on another possibility: argue in SC!
Irrespective of all of the above, none of these are the reasons for the "AOR concept" to be abolished. It does not exist to create a "charm" as your post presupposes. The reasons for the AOR system to be there continue to exist as on today.