The people who did the research have made multiple assumptions, which may be true from their own career perspective, but can be contested on the ground of reality. I am not talking about the NIRF data itself, which is by now dubious at best. My point is about the assumption that permanent faculty always fare better in terms of adding greater value to the institution by way of research, classroom teaching etc. Most people who have studied at various NLUs would attest to the fact that every NLU has way too much dead wood in terms of permanent faculty who represent a liability to the institution and a drain on its resources. Their teaching quality is sub-par, they rarely update themselves and they either don't publish/research at all, or their papers are also of abysmal quality, or even worse, built on exploited student labour. The administration has got no way of throwing these people out because they have got permanent jobs, nor can they be denied promotion because the bar for UGC promotions is ridiculously low. On the other hand, had these people even had a 3-Year or 5-Year contract with all other assorted benefits that come from permanent positions (PF, gratuity, leave, health plan), then the institution could have dispensed with their services after that expired. It is true that contractual faculty would be operating under restrictions insofar as the present system is concerned, such as not being able to stand up against the admin or give in to irrational student demands lest their contracts are terminated, but the solution is to make the renewal process much robust and based on objective parameters, not to make everyone permanent all at once. At the very least, we should adopt a tenure-track system like in the UK or USA, with everyone starting on a contract and then if they prove themselves to be good, then be made permanent after 3 years or 5 years. If anything, that will ensure that the faculty will always have incentives to deliver best performances, do quality research and publications and actively seek projects to bring much needed fund and exposure to the institutes too. That is in the interest of Indian legal education at present, not the 'sarkari-naukri' style permanence, followed by inevitable indolence. The administration needs to convey assurance to the promising ones that their job won't be at stake, and at the same time, communicate to the others that they need to pull up their socks if they wish to remain there.
In addition, every new faculty must be made to go through at least a few demo classes before students as well as existing faculty before they are allowed to teach unsupervised in the degree programmes. That would at least act as a filter for the worst sort, who cannot even communicate effectively or do not have the slightest of ideas about the subjects that they would be asked to teach. A mentorship system should also be in place wherein the faculty with better repute can be shadowed by the junior for at least a semester or two when it comes to classroom teaching or research. Professor Menon himself used to advocate for such a system, but that is barely in vogue anymore.
Finally, the students also need to get their acts together if they wish to be taught by good faculty. Academic discipline must be followed, especially if they see the faculty making effort to teach them well. Refraining from umpteen excuses for not doing assignments, seeking extensions and exemptions, easy grades, lack of advance reading, and providing useful and timely feedback and putting pressure on the administration to act on the basis of such feedback, these are practices that the students may also consider adopting if they really wish to have the quality of their classroom education enhanced. Just because a faculty is not giving in to every student demand, that does not mean that they do not know what the students actually need. Adherence to quality and empathy are both essential traits of a good teacher.
SAM, Trilegal, KCO have their tech law/policy teams. Not all TMT teams work on interesting tech matters though. Among smaller firms, NDA, Ikigai do/are doing decent work. Read up on IT Act, Regulations, the recent Digital India Act, intermediary liability, Puttaswamy judgment and privacy law in general. You may also consider reading up on legal analytics and AI-related issues and get trained in algorithmic audit if you want to stay ahead of the curve. Some NLUs and other universities offer related elective courses too, if you have got friends there, then you can get the material from those courses.
@Mods: A sincere request. Please moderate this thread in a manner so that the needless and toxic, yet inevitable comparison between law schools does not start here. This is a very important issue that deserves genuine focus and concern. The victims, as well as those who are trying to raise their voice and support the victims, deserve better than the thread getting hijacked by those with ulterior motives.
If you have cleared NET, then you don't need to give any exam, just the interview. Otherwise, the exam plus the interview. You need to get 50% above in the exam, but a better bet would be getting at least 65. For the interview stage, prepare a decent proposal and focus on methodologies, basic lit review, scope, RQs, statement of problem etc. Can't tell you about your guide question since you haven't mentioned the area or topic that you wish to do your PhD. There are several decent faculty members, though a little public law heavy maybe. It will also depend on how many scholars are already working under them, because there is an upper limit. But the university can always appoint an internal notional guide and get an expert from outside if they like your proposal. Hope this helps.
@Kian and new Mods: You should note that even if an user hides their username while commenting after logging in, the main page is still showing the comments under their names only. Just pointing out the glitch. For example, I could see several comments on the main page under the userhandle ▮▮▮, when the actual comments have been made under the Guest moniker.
If you can elaborate a bit about what you do like or don't like (such as writing, debating, speaking in public etc.), as well as any other strengths and weaknesses that you have, then it may be easier for people who are willing to help to do so. If it is a 3-Year LLB that you wish to do from Bengal, then try to do from Burdwan University or North Bengal University, instead of any local law college. While these are not great places, they have been offering the programme for long and do have some good alumni and faculty whom you can seek career advice from. If you can spare the fund to go outside Bengal, then DU is obviously the best possible choice. While studying, you can generally focus on examination-based career options, like judiciary examination or even the state/central civil services. Use your vacations to intern at smaller firms, who may be more amenable to accepting 3-Year law students as interns. You can also try to write the CLAT PG examination at the end of 3-Years, since some of the PSUs still shortlist for interviews based on that. Given that you have an UG degree in English, you can try your hands with content-writing during these 3-years to make some extra money. Hope this helps. I know a few people who have been in positions similar to you and the hardworking ones who could maintain focus have turned out to be quite successful by now. So, best of luck and chin up!
To everyone commenting here both in favour of and against Sudhir, maybe you should consider the fact that all of your experiences could have been valid to some extent. He should not be portrayed as a person who can do no wrong, nor someone with malicious intent. The incidents at NUJS took place almost 14-15 years back. Sudhir was a much younger person back then with less experience. He is a human being who makes mistakes and learns from those. That's how good professionals evolve into better ones, by taking lessons from their own experience. Maybe that's exactly what he has done too and is a better teacher and administrator now because of that. At the same time, the students who pulled off such a stunt are all professionals now themselves. If you ask them about it today, chances are that they would all feel regret about what was clearly a juvenile and immature prank that has been embellished and exaggerated since. Please give the bickering a rest, since the people who were actually involved have long since done the same.
It is actually a good idea to read people's work even if they are in conflict with each other. It makes for a good intellectual and evaluative exercise IMHO.
Nice suggestions! Other than Srinivasan, whom I haven't read before but will look up now, I concur that all the others named have really produced some stellar work.
Just develop a good reading habit, listening to other people when they are talking, not allow existing prejudices to prevent you from learning from everyone, and allow for the possibility that many of things that you may have learnt till now can be wrong or at least perceived differently. Be kind, patient, polite and curious, but do not allow other people's opinion of you define your life and actions. Also remember not to compromise with eating and sleeping schedule and develop some basic exercising habit. Rest will fall into place. You are going to a fine institution for the next five years.
Foreign student seats and NRI seats are different. NRIs still have to appear through CLAT and based on such rank, they are shortlisted. For foreign students, CLAT is not necessary. The NLUs are free to come up with any objective criterion for selection. Usually, plus two level marks are used on an equivalence basis to shortlist applicants.
Medicine is not something one should go into unless one is really invested in the idea of being a doctor. It is a tough course and hard life to begin with and we already have way too many doctors practising for the wrong reasons. Studying law is relatively easier and you can later branch into other career choices too based on your affinity, be it management, policy work, and many others. Getting a job after an NLSIU LLB degree will be easier, though in the long run a lot of people would say that relatively more people make more money as practising doctors than as lawyers, assuming that is a factor for you. I would suggest that you talk personally with people in the respective professions as well as those studying it at present and then take a call.
NLSIU has its internal scholarships also, which will depend upon your results and your family income. Don't worry about the student loan that much. SBI will give you one without collateral and you can clear it within 2-3 years after graduation by taking up a job. After that, if you wish to do something else, you will have ample time for that. I had chosen that route for myself.You can also earn while studying by doing a few side hustles like CLAT coaching, which will pay for the mess fees, internship expenses and interest accruing on the loan at the very least. You have got an excellent place to study at, please don't give up hope.
For any student who has cracked CLAT in this year, just a word of advice. Whichever NLU you get into, if you wish to study in one that is considered 'more prestigious', then please keep an eye on that NLU's official website for at least till the end of the first semester, maybe even halfway into the second. People do drop out, even if few in number. If you can afford it, you can still seek admission using your CLAT score, since most NLUs, being cash-strapped, would prefer not to lose fees of 4.5 years from a student.
Of course, whichever NLU you study in, if you maintain your focus and persevere as you did for CLAT for the next 5 years, then you will undoubtedly have a bright career ahead.
Yes, you can give it a year later, but preferably get yourself enrolled in the concerned state bar council as soon as you can. The enrollment will stay valid for some time even if you don't appear for the exam immediately.
Law firms will hire you for corporate practice even without the AIBE, but they will require you to eventually clear it.
Some of the people who work in the Bangalore office, like Alok Prasanna, are very good from what I know. They also provide good mentorship to freshers who join them.
I would like to add one qualification to this comment. It is true that these NLUs and several others may have a more demanding curriculum and pedagogy, but if someone has made the choice that UPSC is going to be their foremost goal, then they can afford to let some of the usual academic expectations take a backseat, maintain a middling CGPA with less effort and focus on the UPSC preparations instead. I have seen students doing it. The advantage of studying at these places will be that one can always have fallback options like private sector jobs even with lesser academic credentials in case UPSC does not work out, given the reputation and alumni base of these places.
In addition, every new faculty must be made to go through at least a few demo classes before students as well as existing faculty before they are allowed to teach unsupervised in the degree programmes. That would at least act as a filter for the worst sort, who cannot even communicate effectively or do not have the slightest of ideas about the subjects that they would be asked to teach. A mentorship system should also be in place wherein the faculty with better repute can be shadowed by the junior for at least a semester or two when it comes to classroom teaching or research. Professor Menon himself used to advocate for such a system, but that is barely in vogue anymore.
Finally, the students also need to get their acts together if they wish to be taught by good faculty. Academic discipline must be followed, especially if they see the faculty making effort to teach them well. Refraining from umpteen excuses for not doing assignments, seeking extensions and exemptions, easy grades, lack of advance reading, and providing useful and timely feedback and putting pressure on the administration to act on the basis of such feedback, these are practices that the students may also consider adopting if they really wish to have the quality of their classroom education enhanced. Just because a faculty is not giving in to every student demand, that does not mean that they do not know what the students actually need. Adherence to quality and empathy are both essential traits of a good teacher.
Of course, whichever NLU you study in, if you maintain your focus and persevere as you did for CLAT for the next 5 years, then you will undoubtedly have a bright career ahead.
Yes, you can give it a year later, but preferably get yourself enrolled in the concerned state bar council as soon as you can. The enrollment will stay valid for some time even if you don't appear for the exam immediately.
Law firms will hire you for corporate practice even without the AIBE, but they will require you to eventually clear it.