We want LI to be one of the friendliest places on the internet, where lawyers and law students help each other with their career related queries and occasionally discuss other stuff that might affect their lives too. In other words:
1. Be kind, respectful and helpful to each other.
2. Be bona fide, truthful, genuine and curious.
3. Assume the best intention of others.
Therefore, in using the site, you must agree to do your best to uphold these community guidelines.
Note that what you find here is written and moderated by anonymous people on the internet.
Therefore everything you read here is very likely unverified, rumour, speculation and/or downright false.
In continuing to read anything here, you must therefore agree not to take anything you read here as factual and that you will exercise due caution, diligence and common sense before acting on any information you may come across here.
You also agree to report any inaccurate or malicious comments with the buttons. Moderators take action within 24 hours, as required and appropriate under law.
Our full terms and conditions apply too.
Do you solemnly agree to all of the above?
You prioritise absolute fairness, as being unfair causes harm, but you forget that doing nothing or being slow is harm too. It is precisely in those scenarios we have developed summary procedures across judicial proceedings right from CPC. In those instances, we forego bits of fairness and reach for speed. Speed is just as much a normative value as fairness. We can argue on equilibrium and balance forever.
You acknowledge other regulators have suo moto powers – to be clear, they adjudicate too. Now rarely does a regulator stake a position against its own legislative mandate, lending a collateral constitutional claim for every litigation it faces. At this point the CCI is advocating for a fairness standard beyond its parent legislation. I see the cynicism in this. If the CCI saw risk, it should have instead said, "We will not take settlements or commitments for the time being" – not abandon its main mandate under Section 19(1).
I mean, think about this objectively: during COVID, the CCI specifically set out public warnings against crisis profiteering, and the threat it used to ensure people did not take advantage of a crisis in a market failure was its suo moto powers under Section 19(1). Removing that power is like a doctor not being able to prescribe medication because he is required to put in writing but he does not have a pen and paper.
On state enforcement, how does that argue against my point? How can procedural fairness be dependant on the number of potential plaintiffs?
If the argument in favour of politically appointed tribunals is the lack of judicial infrastructure how does that justify creating further conflicts of interests in the mechanism?
Lastly, you’re right many other regulators have suo moto powers and the CCI may be placed similarly with all of them. My concern is however more broad based and applies to the moral legitimacy of all such regulatory setups.
BONUS:
1. Confirmation Bonus On probation confirmation within 6 months - 1.3 lakh
2. Performance Bonus - 2.5 lakhs
3. Bar Exam Bonus - 1.3 lakh
This is as per the rewards proposition shared with 2025-26 campus hires. Don’t know about the current status.
It no longer feels like law students are happy watching other law schools succeed, but rather find pleasure in dragging other law schools down and put forth their own agenda.
Maybe once in a while be a little truthful. NLIU this year has had a great year of PPOs with CAM, SAM, TRILEGAL, ICICI, S&R, AZB all offering PPOs . Day zero was conducted pretty well with the assistance of outside placement recruiting assistance companies that assisted and trained the students. This meant significant investment from the University that was approved. Infact this year even NDA has returned for campus placements after significant outreach. Other tier 2 firms are also increasing their hiring and NLIU offers insane internships through its alumni base
Caste system by another name.
??
How is it YOUR 'choice' to govern someone else?
Choice = what you want to wear
When you want to govern what others wear, it's a direction, dictat, order. Not choice. lol.
I agree with the networking part, but how many of them are actually able to make succesful careers out of an LLM through networking? Very few. Every Tom, Dick, and Harry has a foreign llm these days. Even the number of oxbridge grads are quite significant. The people who are actually able to successfully make meaningful connections and better their career from an LLM are maybe 1 in 100. To think a 10 month degree is worth most middle-class families' life savings is foolhardy, to say the least.
But I would say that since you are from a T-1 NLU and you want a career in India, I doubt there would not be any opportunity that you otherwise wouldn't have access to.
Plus it's not exactly a good idea to do an LLM just for the sake of prestige. Go only if you genuinely want to do it, either to specialise in a particular domain or want to try your hand at employment there (almost impossible for US, for UK and other jurisdictions there is a chance if you have a good profile and are at the top of your class in LLM as well) but there are no direct ways in which an LLM helps with employment (no campus recruitment and you are essentially on your own).
regardless of which from which college have you done your LLB from, its a disastrous to do an LLM using your own money unless you are so rich that 1-2 cr is pocket change for you.
So get some work experience first. If you still want to do it and finances allow or you secure a scholarship, go for it.
What can I do now? currently interning in a PE/VC boutique, I like it so far but no employment prospects here.
Which T1s and T2s can I look for? TMT/ transactions/ pe&vc
I am open to other teams too except Tax, Cap Marks and RE.
I need some realistic advice before I start throwing my CV into the void.
For context, I’ve done a couple of internships at T2 firms in disputes which I liked. In talks with one of them for a call-back. I also managed to intern with one of the T1 firms, albeit in a different practice area. I am at the top of my class and and have good co-curriculars as well.
I am trying to understand which firms (and if possible partner initials) should I target to maximise my chances of getting callbacks and a PPO.
I’m looking for Delhi NCR ideally, but I will happily brave the Mumbai locals if it means securing a job. I’m not blindly chasing only SAM / CAM / KCO / AZB /Tri either. I would love to work with firms like JSA, Saraf, Indus, Argus, DSK, B&P, etc. or frankly any firm that offers decent pay (80k plus) and I stand a decent chance of getting recruited. I can also do with lower pay for now, provided the firm is such that there are good prospects of laterally moving into a better paying position after 1-2 years.
Which firms, teams, or specific partners should I be targeting? Who is actually receptive to this kind of profile and has a track record of handing out PPOs?
Please drop names, my sanity (and my future) depends on it. Thanks!
I am very sure that I will be able to clear CS. Do you think doing this is advisible?
PS I am from a small village and I need this money to stay in Mumbai
does it even get considered as a referral, looks like its not
theyve not distinguished it from merit at all.
can someone pls explain?
does that happen or have ppl secured internships via referrals at these places.
Thank you for your answers in advance.
Only downside is that the associates are not allowed to interact directly with Aditya and the counsel. Aditya wouldn’t even know of an associate’s existence.