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?
The percentage of people who choose litigation and become successful like that is far, far lower than the percentage of people who choose law firms and make partner. Moreover, the lit people either undergo a lot of hardship financially to begin with or else have a privileged background. People joining good law firms can start earning decently from day one and also support their families. These are all good enough reasons to choose one over the other. However, your adulation of one group is also over the board. Very few lawyers do anything consciously to 'shape' the law, most of them are trying to represent their clients to the best of their ability and cater to their needs and wants, that's all. A good professional can do well in both. Neither should ideally go after 'fame' or headlines, that's not the role of a lawyer.
1. Law is a field of connections. If you have connections and don’t use them, you’d be an idiot. It’s not a field as idealistic as you want it to be. It may seem unfair that someone gets opportunities via connections, but connections are an asset. And you need to know how to leverage your assets in this field. The good part about connections? You can make your own. It doesn’t need to be a parent putting in a good word. Approach people you interned under, college alumni since you’re apparently in a great college, even LinkedIn. Build connections, that’s one of the only sure shot ways to survive in this field.
2. Competence beats everything else. If you’re competent, a team or a firm will make space for you. Sure, you may have great internships on your CV, but ask yourself why the team didn’t hire you despite that. Maybe you didn’t know basics, maybe your work quality wasn’t good enough, maybe the team didn’t see the interest they expected, maybe you didn’t converse with them enough: a million things could have happened which made them feel you weren’t good enough. And this goes beyond grades and college and connections. I know people who started law school 5-6 years after high school and now have jobs in T-1s, people who are known troublemakers in their colleges yet got PPOs from, people who know far lesser stuff than I do yet about a field of law, yet got campus placements. Yk what they all have in common? They’re pretty good at what they do. You can improve on this. Take a sheet of paper and write down the feedback you received from each internship. Maybe even ask anyone you’re still on good terms with in the team you interned at for honest feedback, not the whole we don’t have vacancy stuff. Work on it, and continue trying to get other internships and opportunities. If you’re competent, something will work out for sure. It may not be what you want, but it will be something.
ATB!
You have two options: first is either keep blaming your college or circumstances (which seems to be what you’re doing.) It’s not good though, as it won’t lead you anywhere. I may not be in a position to say this, but you’ve got to be way tougher than this if you want to survive in this field. Connections and competence aside, law as a field, especially with the rise of AI, needs grit to thrive in and you don’t seem to have that from your post. Maybe you relied too much on your college or maybe you thought things would automatically work out- but they don’t. You have to strive and work to make things happen, sometimes way more than others. It’s unfair, yes, but sometimes inevitable.
Second, you start working to make things happen. Sure, it may not be what you want: maybe you’ll end up in a T-2 or T-3 and grumble, but at least you’ll have something good. Look into options: you have firms, judicial clerkships, in-house opportunities, LLMs. You can do a number of things to survive and make your situation better. The only question is if you’ll do it or not.
Maybe you won’t end up with anything in 2026 either. That’s fine. What’s not fine is not trying.
FACT: There is no T1 any more. NLSIU is the only good NLU out there, because alumni are running the place now. Thanks to corrupt VCs, pathetic faculty, mindless expansion and populist reservation policies, all other NLUs have become pathetic. To make matters worse, most elite families now send their kids to Jindal. They scoop up good jobs because of their social networks, reducing the number of available jobs for NLU grads.
So don’t have any expectations or entitlement because you think you are in a supposedly top law school. Have a backup plan, like an MBA.
Rant Over. Happy New Year to everyone, but not to those who got where they are because the odds were in their favour or those who got stuff simply because they pulled some strings somewhere.
EDIT requested (see below): To mod: Can you please edit my post to say 2026 will be my breakthrough year and I will find the best opportunity out there. On contemplation and support from the Legally India, I realised that I am being too negative and pessimistic about things. Could you edit my post to thank the community and correct the folly that I committed- putting negativity into universe and expecting good things in return.
I am thinking from perspective of taxation and growth. From what I have gathered based on interactions with my inhouse friends, it's not a paper pushing job especially the ones that pay you 20 + and more. You do research, transactions, brief seniors like any other in dispute team etc. and so on. But 30% tax is a lot, compare to no tax up till 75 lakhs.
Should I therefore switch to some tier 2/3 law firms with good WLB. My worry is that it is difficult to shift to a reputed inhouse at a later stage from a tier 2/3 law firm, than from an existing reputed inhouse brand. Thanks.
Can someone who's been in this position before please help out? Whats supposed to be the way ahead? Would surely help a lot.
I had done a deal with them around a year ago they seemed decent enough
▮▮▮.
The lesson is brutally simple. This is India. Truth offers no protection without power. Evidence is meaningless without cover. And the profession operates less like a meritocracy than a cartel. Cross it unprepared, and it will crush you.
Thank you for those who have clarified that this response was not warranted.
Would also like to personally respond to this.
Almost every second year associate in any law firm starts understanding what you have shared. However, not everyone has the luxury of not earning after college. No heat to the lucky ones. Happy for them.
I, for example, wasn't as lucky. This job helped me to get my parents' surgeries done (running to around 25 lacs), get my sister married, got myself married, got my house renovate, bought a house.. Now, could I have waited and worked in litigation? Yes, I could have. But my parents couldn't, my sister couldn't.
So I'll reiterate for your ready reference, what are the salary structures expected for 1st year salaried partners?
Like always, one can expect the Partners to forget about it until 3 days before the deadline, and completely ruin whatever Christmas break the Associates get.
Who even reads this?
Nevertheless, at least some reforms have been accepted.
If only he put in so much thought to revive the economy (as is his job)
Calling on anyone who knows the details on this to shed some light. Let's put this forum to good use.
Kindly get in touch with my Secretary.
She will provide you with my detailed charge list.
Very informative and apt.
a. Coming to specialisation. It does not matter. If you want to apply for a corporate job, they won't care about your LL.M. Law firms won't hire you because you have a specialisation in corporate law. Unless you are specifically interested in a specialisation, it does not matter.
b. That said, if you end up not clearing your judicial services exam (which remains a possibility). You will use this master's as a gateway to Indian legal academia. Interestingly, Indian legal academia does not consider domestic LLMs to be of much repute (funny, eh?). From what I have realised during your LLMs, you try to convince a professor (who won't be, because they will all know that you will pursue government services after this) to hire you as an RA. Trust me, the entry barriers to this market are much higher than actual monopolies.
c. If you end up getting a job in academia, know this: you will have two papers - bread and butter (that you do for earning a living) and your specialisation (that you do for yourself). A common specialisation, as much as you might want to think otherwise, makes your competition tougher. Advertisements for AP might not mention these specialisations, or you end up competing with so many others who do. So a general LLM works better in the long run.
d. However, a specialisation might actually open a door for a future master's in a good foreign university after a few years of work. I hope this helps.
Bottom LINE: NLUD for you. Don't specialise.
a. LL.Ms are not considered of primary importance. And, while it has something to do with so many other things (like CLAT LLB being more competitive, etc.), it is primarily because your footprint in the university will be for less than a year.
b. That being said, few universities took good care of their LL.Ms like NLU Delhi took. The undergrads were much more welcoming, integration was not a problem, the public law cohort was led by a solid group of professors like Aparna, Mrinal, Niraj (Kumar), etc., who were awesome. Trust me, the time is so short, you might not end up learning anything at all, but being in that environment, seeing larger-than-life profs was truly inspiring for me (a big reason why I ended up in academia was my experience at NLUD).
c. That said, most good profs have left NLUD and their private or public law isn't as good as it used to be.
d. Coming to your point specifically, let us consider your end goal to be the judicial services (as you mentioned). Will it be efficient to uproot everything (reading hours and hours of bare acts, judgment writing, etc.) and go to Bangalore and then again within the blink of an eye come back to Delhi? Logistically, NLUD makes more sense. They still continue to hold the policy that boys wont be given on campus housing. So that way you are not obliged to stay on campus. You save money.
e. Let us come to what is taught. LLMs, if done right, will seldom teach you your bare acts. It will reach deep down to theory and philosophy of which ever area you wish to specialise in. Knowing the group that teaches in NLSIU, it will be a complete detour from your judiciary goals.
f. I, of course, am taking nothing away from teachers at NLUD. Some in comparative public law will give you a run for your money. However, it will be far more manageable than NLSIU.
NN's recent CFA (0-3 PQE) for Tri Blr was received w a lot of excitement, but I'm unsure about if there have been any calls for interviews as of yet. Any concrete updates someone can share?
Myself, LIPSA RANI BHUYAN and
I completed my BA-LLB from Guru Govind Singh Indraprastha University and enrolled in BCD and cleared AIBE and recently i am searching for law firm
Any leads?
Be relaxed and not so desperate for an internship.
If you have the skillset and know your law, you should be fine.
It has completely disappeared from the scene now. What happened to it?
To the young crop of ambitious final year law students and junior associates: you are not compensated for brilliance; you are compensated for Availability.
### 1. The Compensation Cap is Real and Low
You have entered the highest-paying legal segment in India, and yet:
- The highest starting pay for a graduate lawyer in India (even at T-1, Corporate, Big City, <20 LPA) is less than what Investment Bankers and top Software Engineers from top colleges start with.
- Achieving a few Cr/annum income the standard for successful business folks in Delhi/Mumbai/Bangalore is a pipe dream for most lawyers.
### 2. The Partner’s Job is Sales, Not Law
Partners are glorified salespeople running a service desk. Their entire job is a ruthless balancing act:
- - Client's insane hours expectations.
- - Insane turnaround times.
- - Constantly cost-cutting so the deal doesn't move to SAM, AZB, Trilegal, JSA over a few lakh difference.
- Your expertise is a commodity in this system.
###
### 3. Your Expertise is Generic
After 4-5 years in "sophisticated" deal work, you are not an expert in anything genuinely proprietary. The work is so generic that your true, portable skillset is limited to:
- - Work ethic (ability to pull all nighters and work weekends without boundaries).
- - Document management (administration which is simply handled by good software in most global corporates).
- Not a specialized, high-value practice that clients can't get elsewhere for less.
###
### 4. The In-House Pivot is a Concession, Not a Gain
Taking a pay-cut for an in-house role is the de facto escape route, but we need to call it what it is: a significant surrender of earning potential without the equity, perks, or real work-life balance enjoyed by in-house counsel abroad.
###
### 5. The Golden Handcuffs are tighter in expensive cities like Mumbai
Look around at the SAs, PAs, and Counsel who stay past the point of no return:
- They are either Mumbai-based locals who don't bear the full brunt of rent and have a family support system.
- Or they are settled with spouse/kids and are entirely dependent on the firm's consistent paycheck. They cannot afford a sabbatical, a pivot, or the freedom to explore a better life elsewhere. This is why they stay.
---
-
My Advice to the A0s and A1s:
-----------------------------
Work Intentionally From Day One. Your goal is not partnership; your goal is optionality.
- Assess what portable skills (e.g., specific regulatory knowledge, commercial negotiation) you are gaining that can be applied outside the firm.
- The sacrifice (health, family, sleep, hobbies) only makes sense if it rapidly accelerates you to a position of financial independence and career choice, not just a slightly bigger bonus.