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?
While all this is happening, there are sons and daughters of judges, bureaucrats and ministers running multi-crore law practices sustained almost entirely by Union of India and PSU panel work. WTF, Tushar! Isn't the BJP better than the UPA1/2 in matters like this?
Despite my practice, I still have the time and — dare I say — the experience to do good work with State panel and PSU matters. But alas, in comparative terms, one could argue that I am “unemployed.” It is only natural that anyone in this position and under these circumstances would feel rubbed the wrong way when he or she is equated with a cockroach by those call the shots.
An eminent jurist, whom I will not name for obvious reasons, recently described lawyers in my situation — especially those who also do RTI/activism work (I don’t) — as “cockroaches.”
Earlier, I had my doubts, but now I am convinced that pursuing a career in litigation was a stupid call on my part all along. I say this because, in this country, there are judges who not only test your case on merits, but also on your pedigree and parentage. I would not, for any client’s sake, want to appear, even with a good case, before a judge who thinks I am a cockroach!
Rhetorical question: could this, even partly, explain why certain senior advocates charge tens of lakhs of rupees for hearings that may not even last two minutes? Has the standard of judges occupying high positions been deliberately kept such as to preserve an uneven playing field?