I'm a first year at a T1 NLU. While this NLU is well reputed for its corporate placements and mooting accolades, especially in recent times, it lacks the intellectual thrill I would've expected from a T1 NLU. My batchmates seem disinterested in any actual discussion. Most conversations pivot to upcoming parties, senior gossip, tests or submissions, and it's borderline impossible to get anyone on board for a genuine discussion on anything non-surface level. People in general come off as close-minded and reserved, unless you conform to their clique. Maybe the lack of an active student body (or student culture in general) and thus a lack of a political atmosphere on campus, could be a reason for this.

No points for guessing the NLU, as it's already pretty obvious by now.

Maybe it's too early to judge this place, and maybe I haven't found the right people. Anyhow, I'd love to hear anything that can help change my opinion.

I read up everything there is on the topic and then I start working. My partner has been quite understanding and she doesn't say anything since I get the work done. Is it going to be a huge issue when I switch? Please guide me on what I can do about this. I am planning to go through the entire companies act, basics of contracts etc. Is there anything else I have to do?

This is extremely true. No one wants to invest in training freshers, chindi law firm owners only care about their bottomline. For now they are displacing juniors with AI but soon it will hit them like a truck when they won't have mid- level SAs/A3/A4 to manage things in future.

And in 2-3 years, there would be no one with 2-3 years of relevant experience anywhere. The market will correct itself with time.

You may require almost zero freshers right now but if fresher hiring goes down significantly then you will not have experienced professionals since a majority of fresher hires anyway leave the profession within a few years.

Hi All,

I am an SA (Disputes) at a Tier 2/Tier 3 pan India law firm and normally a very optimistic person. However, given the state of things, I believe there is a duty on me (and anyone else associated with this field) to let the current law students/ upcoming freshers know of the harsh reality that is already hitting / will hit even more in the near future.

FRESHER HIRING IS ALREADY/ WILL GO DOWN TO NEAR ZERO IN THE COMING MONTHS

At law firms in general, the consensus is that we need to leverage AI to do the grunt work faster and in a smoother manner. This means that the job profile of freshers is just not there anymore.

Think of it cost wise. A claude pro account at an enterprise level costs about 5 to 10k a month and gives you a very decent amount of tokens which refresh every 5 hours. It can give you a first draft, go through documents, pull out research, even do formatting all in 10 mins. A fresher making about 70-80k a month in a tier 2/tier 3 firm will require training, constant oversight and 1 full day to produce a draft which will not even be half as decent as what Claude gave you. Think of it from the business perspective, why would the law firm hire a fresher for 80k instead of giving the existing team access to Claude?

This is not just speculation. At just my office, we hired 19 freshers from the 2024 batch, 16 from the 2025 batch and only 3 from the 2026 batch. The management has also made it clear that there is a fresher hiring freeze for the foreseeable future. It is not as if there are no hirings, there are a lot of open positions but no Partner wants to hire anyone below 2 to 3 years of solid experience because that work is now done by Claude at 1/10th the time and price with 5x the quality.

To all law students/freshers, this is the harsh reality.

Every month I see so many interns join, with quite a few of them asking for assessment internships and call backs. A lot of them are genuinely nice candidates who would have probably gotten a PPO if it was 2 or 3 years ago but right now no one wants a fresher at all. I am not trying to discourage anyone but just telling the truth. For those in the final years of college already, I guess there is no turning around unless you want to change streams so please try your luck especially with chambers for disputes. However, law students in early years or those in school thinking of taking law and pursuing a career in a law firm, guys please understand that the world has moved on very rapidly. By the time you finish law there may not be any jobs left for your experience range. So please think of it in advance and decide accordingly.

Regards,

A former fresher and a well-wisher.

I agree with some parts of this, but not everything. Favouritism is definitely an issue, but it’s not limited to this one person. There are other senior people, including SAs and PAs, who are protected by different partners despite making others uncomfortable (yes not rude but causing actual discomfort). These issues rarely get addressed, and there isn’t much anyone can do about it.

There are people who have driven away other partners and still continue to be protected (despite not yet being a partner). That’s the bigger problem here. It’s not really about one person, but how things work in the organisation.

If you’re joining, be prepared for gossip and politics. The funny part is that the organisation claims to be gossip-free. In reality, being in the good books of the right people, whether in Litigation or Corporate, can take you a long way. Merit matters, but so does knowing how to navigate the politics.

Actually no. One steps up or does not based on who the actual responsibility lies with. I've seen partners fuck up worse than newly minted senior associates when working under someone else, and thrive when handling matters themselves. So once a partner always a partner title wise - may be ok, but otherwise no.

JGLS is losing its way.

In the name of transparency and leadership, everyone is being overworked. Policies get made, then ignored by the very people who made them. Faculty are frustrated, overwhelmed and exhausted.

Micromanagement has turned the ED's office into a bottleneck that slows almost everything at JGLS.

Favouritism is the bigger problem. Rewards go to those with image perception and pseudo power, not credentials: the ones who know how to butter up. An inner circle gets promotions, foreign trips, limelight and increments, often justified as "working overtime." Everyone else gets a very different tone. Some students with direct access to the ED's office use it to get whatever they want.

Confidentiality is also being ignored. Personal HR details, including promotions and salaries across the law school, are reportedly shared with [...] who is a faculty member himself. That should never happen.

Decision-making has narrowed to a few people. [...] now looks like the de facto ED, and the Director of the Law School seems to be out of the process.

The new administration is largely junior because many senior people left JGU or administration over this very behaviour. Those who remain, including experienced leaders, play it safe instead of speaking up.

The irony is hard to miss. The ED spent all the time criticising Prof. Shrijeeth's administration, yet is repeating the same practices, and in worse ways. She believes things are getting better. The reality on the ground is the opposite.

What dominates now is petty politics, gossip and busywork instead of substance. JGLS deserves better.

As above, looking to intern with an independent counsel based in Delhi. I am not native to Delhi (and am a woman) hence would prefer to intern in South Delhi or around. My experience has been banking (structured finance, insolvency & cross-border lending) on the corporate side but would love to explore the disputes side, or any independent counsel who does corporate banking as well. Would love any leads/recommendations/reviews!!!

Not questioning intellectual competency, but the way these managers boss around the juniors and end up doing nothing apart from AI driven copy pasting makes one wonder are they really worth the mentors ? Over the course of my interaction with many senior counsels across DHC , I have only heard tales of them being dissatisfied with the work product of these firms and lack of basic knowledge. Also these managers don't guide a fresher at all.

Anyways, even when a SA/PA ends up becoming a partner, how will they survive when they can't punch in clients, I understand that PIP's are for associates, but how about firms think of a PIP for a partners not attracting clients?

1. It is tough to get clients for yourself for an independent practice.

2. It takes time to establish a practice and there are uncertainties over income.

Some people require the peace of mind that comes with a predictable monthly income. Not everyone has the same risk appetite, due to a variety of reasons. Not branching out to one's own practice is not a testament to competence.

Why is this thread going on and on? There is a simple solution which is acceptable to most reasonable people:

1. Give SC/ST/OBC students the bare minimum passing mark if they are failing. This poses zero threat to GC students seeking T1 law firm jobs.

2. Simultaneously, give SC/ST/OBC the chance for an improvement exam/resit (at no cost).

3. For cheating in an exam, follow the IIT policy of a fresh exam sheet. Policy 1 still applies for SC/ST/OBC students. Again, no threat to GC students seeking coveted jobs.

I fear I have put myself in a box and ruined my chances. I am currently in my Fifth year, and most of my internships have been in IPR. I don't see firms hiring now and I'm pretty scared of my chances now. My last two internships have been at IP Boutique firms, and before that at KCO and LKS. I fear it's too late to shift to another interest area, and would preferably want to get a job. I do have a lot of anxiety about just the general hiring environment and any chances at it, or if I should go for an LLM etc, and the future in general. Any guidance will do.

Two views among liberals:

1. View one: Sharjeel deserves due process, but he is an anti-liberal Islamist, so don’t simp over him.

2. View two: He deserved due process AND his views are valid.

View one is the prevailing majority sentiment among liberals post the op-ed, but Gautam Bhatia has expressed view 2, which is a dissenting minority view among liberals. Saket Gokhale and Mujib Mashal have also leaned towards view 2.

https://x.com/gautambhatia88/status/2112689187791294951