Three Judges of the Supreme Court, justices Madan B Lokur, Gopal Gowda and Kurian Joseph, attended a book launch function at the Indian Law Institute, New Delhi yesterday (11 April).
While Justice Lokur formally released the book, Appointing our judges: Forging independence with accountability edited by Supreme Court advocate Santosh Paul, and sat through the speeches delivered by other panellists, he disappointed the audience by not speaking on the contentious subject himself, as he was part of the recent Constitution bench that struck down the NJAC Act.
Among the panellists, Santosh Paul and Fali Nariman defended the NJAC judgment, while TR Andhyarujina and Dushyant Dave were critical of it.
But, as the function was drawing to a close, before the publishers could propose a vote of thanks, senior counsel Indira Jaising stood up and asked the panellists to respond to a few questions on the subject.
When Santosh Paul agreed, Jaising responded, prefacing her question by asking whether judges are expected to say /Bharat Mata Ki Jai/.
She then asked the panellists to respond whether the NJAC judgment should be seen as tyranny of the unelected or as the court’s undoing the will of the people.
Perhaps sensing that the ensuing question-answer session could prove embarrassing (or perhaps having run out of time before their next appointment), Justice Lokur exited first, swiftly followed by Justice Kurian Joseph, who were both part of the NJAC bench.
Justice Gowda, however, left only once Santosh Paul began answering the question. With both Nariman and Dave having left already, only Paul and Andhyarujina remained on the dais to answer Jaising’s question.
Andhyarujina, having already made his comments criticising the phenomenon of judges appointing themselves, while the judges were still there, chose not to respond to Jaising.
But Paul’s nuanced answer to the question appeared to satisfy Jaising (he said that if the government’s criticisms of the NJAC judgment were accepted, then Kesavananda Bharati too should no longer be good law).
While the judges were still there, Nariman sensitively avoided discussing the current imbroglio over the Memorandum of Procedure between the Collegium and the Government.
Dave, however, candidly told the judges that they should not have allowed the government to have a say in drafting the MoP
threads most popular
thread most upvoted
comment newest
first oldest
first
1) In today's TOI it says 45,000 students are giving the exam. If seats available at the NLUs are compared with the 19 IIMs, does this make CLAT as competitive as the IIM CAT exam? If yes, the government must intervene and give central status to NLUs like IIMs and IITs, so that they get more funds.
timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/bengaluru/A-9-yr-high-CLAT-sees-45k-students-vie-for-law-seats/articleshow/51786947.cms
2) CLAT candidates are very confused about which law school to choose. Which NLU has the best placements, infra, campus life, faculty etc? Also, is it better to choose Symbi/Jindal etc compared to lower ranked NLUs?
Every year, Legally India diligently and admirably covers the placements and mooting success of the lawschools, which should be a good indicator of the standing of the lawschools. Search and read Legally India articles on placements and Mooting Premier League (the latter covers the success of NLUs at national/international mock trial competitions and they speak a lot about the quality of a lawschool). All CLAT aspirants should read such articles. Having said that, here is a rough ranking (my personal view):
1. NLSIU
2. NALSAR and NUJS (its a tie although some may say NALSAR is better)
3. NLU Jodhpur
4. NLU Delhi (not part of CLAT)
5. NLIU Bhopal and GNLU Gandhinagar (again, its perhaps a tie, although you should look at recent placement stats)
Note that most top firms have historically displayed a preference for NLSIU, NALSAR, NUJS, NLUJ in terms of recruitment/internships (some firms have the terrible culture of paying stipends only to interns from these lawschools). Also note that Amarchand allegedly likes GNLU for the "gujju" connection and, therefore, hires from GNLU.
I do not know much about the other / newer colleges but RGNUL Patiala is perhaps better than HNLU Raipur (the latter has massive state quota). RMNLU Lucknow, CNLU Patna, NLUO Orissa, NLUs at Ranchi, Gauhati, etc. are too new for me to comment. However, they certainly have the "NLU culture", which is discussed in the next paragraph.
Symbiosis is best avoided since one is better off saving the hefty tuition money for an overseas/Ivy/Oxbridge LLM, by doing the LLB from ILS or Delhi University or GLC. However, many Symbiosis students have done well for themselves. That notwithstanding, Symbiosis has been unable to stay on top of the new NLUs despite being an older institution. The reason for this, perhaps, is that the NLUs (new and old) have a lot of similarities in their culture, even though faculty and infrastructure standards vary massively. These cultural similarities are tremendously helpful in personality and cognitive development, which is reflected by the fact that the new NLUs have done done better than Symbiosis at many national level events. Placements at the new lawschools are likely to change over time. If I were a recruiter, I would ignore the lawschool if the candidate is awesome. Alas, Indian law firms fail to have that attitude and some small firms will rather hire from the top NLUs even if they find better candidates from lower ranked institutions.
Jindal is an excellent place to study law, but terribly expensive. Their placements may not indicate the reality because many students there are well connected and may have been hired by firms owing to their family's contacts.
If anyone wants to add to this, please do! Again, I didn't mean to offend any lawschool.
www.livemint.com/Politics/F45Aaf0k3tTT0DqxO8JIgL/18-applicants-did-not-write-test-IIM.html
www.mbauniverse.com/article/id/9188/CAT-2015
So it looks like IIM CAT is more competitive?
threads most popular
thread most upvoted
comment newest
first oldest
first