Did the letter which came with your law school first semester exam results sheet advise you to drop out of law school and pursue something else? Asking because I sincerely hope it did - and if it was a top five NLU, it should have done. It is not the LI moderator who is "lazy" or a "troll", it's you. Have you never been taught what a rhetorical question is?

PS: Just to clarify, I agree with the substance of OP's post, even though I don't like the use of language.

i know exactly which moot you're talking about. it's ▮▮▮. i was there last year, it's ▮▮▮. they charged 7000 per team and had 121 regs out of which 24 advanced to oral rounds on campus. the organisation was SO BAD, the rounds did not start on time, THEY DID NOT EVEN GIVE US FOOD, we had to eat the mess food. EVEN WORSE, they made us check out of the hotel ON THE DAY OF THE SEMI FINALS/FINALS, we literally had to pack our bags and leave the hotel in between the rounds.

they did not give us a good valedictory ceremony, THEY DID NOT GIVE THE SEMI FINALISTS CERTIFICATES, and as soon as the so called ceremony was over, the ▮▮▮ disappeared and threw the other OC members under the bus when the participants started questioning

Wow!! There are five proper public law schools in Delhi (Delhi alone, not NCR):
> NFSU Law
> NLU Delhi

> FOL, Delhi University
> FLS, South Asian University and
> Indian Law Institute (less popular as it only offers higher degree programmes)

No other city can match this overall ecosystem.

Agreed. A while back, the disability activists got very angry because an enrolment form for SAU (one of those forms you fill up as part of the formalities for joining the uni, once your admission is confirmed) asked the incoming students to sign a declaration saying that they had no physical or mental disabilities. It was causing quite a storm on Twitter, I remember - sadly didn't follow the story, so don't know what happened in the end. A university who is so unaware of the law... how can you expect them to offer a good law course to their students?

I am currently in my 4th year of law school, really struggling to make any progress with getting myself placed in this bleak market. Given how the hiring market is, my limited options now appear to be restricted to Disputes teams.

However, working in Disputes has always scared me. I like the work, but am anxious that I would be losing out on whatever little time I have to myself. I am not a party goer, but I would like some time off to prepare for higher studies or a future career transition.

How bad is it? Will it suck the life out of me completely? Would I not even have the weekends off? Please help me figure out what it might be like realistically, and if it'd end my plans for exploring higher education/alternate career options completely. TIA!

Saw another post where someone was mentioning their difficulties in speaking English. I actually have the exact opposite issue.

I'm currently doing litigation and have to interact with a lot of people. However, I do not have command over the language and become very socially awkward when I'm speaking Hindi, since all my schooling was down south.

What can I do to improve my situation? It's really affecting me

Historically , even thou Bar Council of India (BCI) and University Grants Commission (UGC) rules prescribe minimum attendance rules; these were not followed by GLC Mumbai. However I heard rumours that thats about to change with University of Mumbai going to bring the 75% rule to Institutions under it. In case that happens they might bypass it via deemed attendance or something similar, or its end of era

> I have never really been able to get my head around the financials of successful law firm partners as compared to successful litigators. Everywhere, one hears the same broad claims about the prestige of litigation and that litigators eventually earn significantly more, among other things. Can someone help pin this down to actual numbers, even if only in broad ranges? More specifically, even if a litigator earns substantially more in later years, does it realistically compensate for the income foregone over the first 15 to 20 years, as compared to someone who starts out and continues in a law firm?
>
>
>
> > My position: 3 years PQE in a decent drafting/filing chamber. Have a T1 offer, but something in me wants to join a senior at this stage. Want to make a decision after carefully considering the financial implications.

Hi so I am from a tier 99 clg and I am in my 6th sem (5 years integrated course ) and my only achievements are 4 months litigation internship under Human rights lawyer . Top 15 finalist in a legal quiz competition organised by clg and cseet cleared . Now with this profile can I get internships in botique law firms

Also suggest some firms - currently i know dhir and dhir for ibc

Also is faking your cgpa good idea ? Because on reddit I have heard that they don't very your cgpa

Look, I am OP of the post you replied to. All I'm saying is, not everything is in hands of the partner/PA/SA and there are so many variables and out of control factors, due to which they behave the way they do. The mail which got forwarded late to you, sometimes the other guy did not even realise you weren't marked or didn't even see or couldn't get time to even assess and forward you. Something urgently was asked to be made and didn't get reviewed, probably someone came with even more urgency or some other thing in same matter took precedence. Understaffed on a matter, no team recruitment due to P&L issue. I can go on but this is what is real life issue in this profession and this is why despite all associates cribbing about it, they do exactly same when they get promoted. At the same time, are everyone doing best they can? The answer would be somethings can be better. Not everything. Generally every senior tries to ensure that their team is protected and not get screwed (and i would definitely acknowledge that it's not universal) but so many times things are beyond them. And one pretty honest answer (at least for me), seniors do notice when someone picks up load without cribbing and ensure that the same person is also sometimes given lighter assignment or more likely, extra bonus or some other opportunities. No one would like to lose a good person and there's always some try to give them a semblance of better things till you can. The trick always is to see the person and figure out what works for them best in terms of reward, for someone its money, for someone its independence, for someone its nature of work and so forth and give them that as acknowledgement. Till the time the profession can be structurally improved, but still in line with market expectation. All associates cribbing about tight timeline ask for turnaround in same time, once they go in-house. So yeah, lot many things can be done but its not universal that seniors are out to kill happiness of juniors.

Thanks for the advice. Yes, I wrote it myself. The problem is not my understanding or expressing the language in writing but me not being able to express myself verbally in the best way possible. I often go blank and that blankness itself gets prolonged because my mind isn't trying to find the correct word but is actively thinking about how the next person is going to judge me.

Seen the jiggles where IG was CoE and seen the jiggles where the current Regi was CPO. When current Regi was CPO, we didnt even know who was the CP. Be that as it may, KL has really ramped up both the offices, made them efficient, made them accountable/ transparent in their functioning (you may disagree with the suspensions qua the war on drugs BUT they weren't without warning, i.e., rules were known to all kids and one may even argue that this was the right dawa to the kind of challenge prevalent on campus) and done the right things to make the systems work. He would be an asset as the Regi.