You don't have to believe anyone - go look at the case history and see who was involved at the high court level and the initial supreme court level. Look at the order of petition filing and arguments. All you need to get in Time is a good PR agent. Same for top journo interviews.

That’s very interesting! Why did Gopal decline? Is it because he would rather align with Congress or BJP? Is it because he got his fingers burnt while representing Mahua? Is it because he does not want to get involved in politics?

Also, could it be that maybe Gopal was about to be offered, but Mamata made a last minute switch and offered it to Menaka after her rant against Raju? Because the media in Bengal is suggesting that was the turning point.

So I should believe an anonymous LI commentator over Time magazine? If the world‘s most respected magazine says that she and Arundhati Katju were responsible for winning the case, then I will absolutely believe it. The two of them were also interviewed by Fareed Zakaria, who is one of the world’s top journalists. Are all these people fools?

Also, where is this theory coming from that certain very senior people were responsible for the case? In most cases, it is the junior lawyers, who do the heavy lifting and seniors who take the credit.

Yes, maybe other lawyers were involved but very credible sources have acknowledged them as akin to Player of the Match. Their role was equivalent to the innings that Sanju Samson played yesterday.

Depends on organization. It can range from 12 to 16 LPA for 3-4 years PQE at the lower end and 30 to 40 LPA at the higher end. Funds, MNCs in Energy sector and few Indian corporates pay at the higher end. Otherwise, it is generally at the lower end. Also, keep in mind this is salary and not retainership fees. So tax deducted at source is higher when you are a salaried employee.

I will go till the end of my days, seemingly, fighting this appalling, irresponsible, imprecise, dangerous, misleading, malicious usage of the word "discrimination".

Please stop using "discrimination" like this. It doesn't mean what you think it means. The uni you attended isn't an immutable characteristic. Sure, societal phenomena related to immutable/protected characteristics may have played a part in where you eventually landed up, but declaring your university educational circumstances to be as much beyond your control as your school circs would have been deprives you, as an adult, totally of a sense of agency. And may I point out that to the uninformed outsider, this brash, careless, dangerous, disappointing, ignorant and irresponsible use of "discrimination" might indicate as though your non-top-five or non-top-six law school didn't teach you what the unis you mentioned teach their students. Do you find even their mediocre students talking nonsense like this?

If you are not from T1 (NLS, NALSAR, NLUD, NUJS, GNLU, NLUJ) some firms don't even consider you as a potential candidate. Certainly 1 exam given before starting the 5 year course can not decide how a person is now.

Anyways, the more I talk to my seniors before starting my 4th year, the more I realize that I will have to put in more efforts than these guys to claim a PPO or Day Z offer at the very least.

1. Well, a good grasp of English is, whether you like it or not, a prerequisit to having a good grasp of the law in many fields. Take international law, for example. Read Eliav Lieblich's paper, 'Doing Research in International Law'. He specifically says that if you can't 'access' at least one of the languages of English or French, you will have a lot of trouble working in international law. You don't need to be word-perfect, but understanding it is very much necessary. So your comment seems to be the paradigmatic (if you understand what that word means) case of sour grapes (a term used in Harry Potter, so you'd have to claim that HP readers are privileged now).

Sorry (especially to the moderators) if my comment sounds sarcastic. It's just that this nonsense has gone far enough. We need to face some facts. I am writing out these facts for the so-called non-privileged candidates who alegedly (and were I speaking in person, I would do an immitation of how Rick Jerome emphasizes the word "alleged" when doing an impression of Dr James Akrington at his most supersilious in Jerome's audiobook reading of Ngaio Marsh's 12th Roderick Alleyn book, 'Colour Scheme') got rejected because of their English-speaking skills, in sentences with only a main clause and no subordinate clauses, where possible. We are an ex-British colony. English is a very important language of our legal system. Our laws are written in English. We wouldn't have been seen to be as good a business proposition for foreign investors as we are, had it not been for English. The National Law School's medium of instruction is English. The works of legal philosophy important for our lawyers to understand are written in English. Why don't you sit down and do a massive translation project of Hart, Dworkin, Fuller, Raz, Frank, Bagehot, Llewellyn etc, into Hindi and other Indian vernacular languages? So were I the National Law School's head at the current moment, I would unapologetically say that any recruitment criteria that is a proxy for good English is a criteria worth retaining and strengthening further (especially if it involves rejecting you, the writer of the comment I am responding to).

2. This point can be much more briefly stated. Please elaborate, point by point, on all the gaps in the CV, profile, experience and knowledge of this person, that make him an unsuitable hire. And explain what qualifies you (and/or somebody else you know, mentioning no names of course) who would have been rejected, or has been rejected, under the current dispensation.

Hoping you haven't had to consult a dictionary too often to read this response.

Regards,

Somebody with common sense who doesn't hesitate to say what he means.

If even a word of what you said were true, obviously, it would be the scandal of the century in Indian legal education. But the key there is if.... And I think a pretty important key. Because the (and I am borrowing a very nice phrase a fellow commentator here coined) Sudhir-hating internet trolls are still very much alive and well. The most charitable interpretation of your comment is that you wrote it when high, confusing Sudhir with one of the other corrupt NLU VCs.

Why are those very people not working at the other NLUs then, who do go by solely such scores? There are very few people in other NLUs who are competent enough for current day NLS, and almost all of them have been invited at least once by Sudhir. API scores and 'decades of experience' do not make a good teacher, many career academics know how to game the system.

Thing is- He is not hiring for his own private college where he can hire his friends and relatives to his hearts content. This is a public university. He has a fiduciary duty to hire the best. Its not entirely subjective when candidates with decades of experience and API scores in the hundreds/ books by OUP/CUP aren't even interviewed because they aren't near and dear to the powers that be right? for every decision taken- there has to be a justification provided- a short listing criteria, interview scores etc. Other public universities follow these rules. NLS doesn't. You think its not hurting NLS so far because you don't know the comparator- you don't know who you could have had work there if it weren't for these corrupt practices.

A recent moot charged ₹8,000 per team, stating that the fee includes accommodation. 100+ teams registered. Only 24 qualified for oral rounds.

That means remaining teams paid the full ₹8,000 — but did not qualify.

If accommodation is part of the fee structure, and a team doesn’t advance to the stage where accommodation is actually required, why is there no partial refund? What exactly is being paid for in such cases?

These guys are so loyal to the TMC and do their bidding, yet Mamata does not give a penny to NUJS. She has allocated thousands of crores for Madrasa development in the recent state budget. Nothing for NUJS.

Fine if you want to cancel right-wing speakers, but at least ask your Didi to give the college some money???

So, a few months ago, on 15th December, 2025, somewhere around 600 applicants applied for one associate position in Nikhil Narendran's TMT team. Has anyone heard anything? Did they conclude thier process? I mean, it's high time, I guess. It's almost been 2.5 months. If someone knows anything, please let me know. I would appreciate it. Thanks.

Those who will reach great heights are risk-takers who are brave enough to choose careers other than working as slaves for CAM and SAM. That’s what all these achievers have done. Unfortunately, very few such people exist in the other law schools, because they suffer from a typical middle class mindset: grades and jobs. Adding to the problem is that they have very poor quality faculty, who do not inspire them enough to pursue challenging and intellectually stimulating careers.

Although Amit Malviya is no angel, this is one case Menaka could have stayed away from. Not good optics for a human rights lawyer to represent the TMC regime in this case. She could have focused solely on the IPAC raid case and the attack against the ASG, where she demanded that Mamata be shown respect, which went viral. That would have been enough.

https://www.thestatesman.com/bengal/bjp-slams-trinamools-decision-to-field-advocate-menaka-guruswamy-for-rajya-sabha-polls-1503564470.html/amp

President’s rule is a real possibility in Bengal now. It’s hard to see how the pending SIR cases can be resolved in time for the election, given that the term of the assembly ends in early May. If President’s rule is ultimately imposed, the chances of regime change become strong.

Nevertheless, even if there is no regime change, one improvement that needs to happen is the induction of Menaka Guruswamy in the EC, replacing some of the mediocre lawyers and TMC acolytes.

None of these things matter. The hard reality is that saffron brigade cannot dislodge Kindness without the support of Nagpur Bros. Kindness, Common Man have utility for Nagpur Bros.

Saffron lacks organisational heft and grassroot understanding of Bengal. Having some disconnected CR Park lot and some absentee landlords and NRBs as advisers will do zilch. And the Jokers in WB aren't Yeduruppa who can stare down the Delhi overlords.

Kindness and Co will win again this time maybe with reduced margins. But when saffron will eventually win, it is going to rivet in for a very long time.

I struggle to articulate well in front of large crowds; I often go blank. Can this career help me step out of my comfort zone? I feel extremely anxious, tbh plus my poor language skills.

If you have experience in this field, could you share some potential difficulties I might face over time?

This firm is a well regarded boutique practice. Instead of fabricating job offers or posting unverified claims, I would encourage everyone to focus on their own work. Legally India is clearly moderating comments that are meant to troll, are defamatory or designed to provoke. Anonymous threads rarely reflect the reality.

The “saffron brigade” mention is a reference to the conspiracy theory that the TMC acts as the B-team of the BJP, by exterminating the Left Front in the state and weakening INDIA Alliance unity.

The person who posted the comment is very obviously a Left supporter. But otherwise he or she was spot on that MG would be rewarded with an RS ticket for her outburst.

As someone who is not from Delhi and practising litigation here for the last three years, I keep hearing a lot of chatter on how some lawyers earn their bread and butter from helping parties settle outside court, either through their contacts in the judiciary or otherwise. I want to know how true this is? Also, how many lawyers help in brokering deals/transactions and take their commission for it?

I don't want to shade anyone, just interested in what other folks think about it and how common this is.