You mean the Dube couple? 🙈 Bro, please aim higher, to say the least! NUJS needs someone of the stature and credentials of Sudhir. Get an alum. Nemika Jha (topper of the first batch) teaches corp law at Jindal and is a Harvard grad. Also worked in T1 Indian and US firms, plus at the SC. Perfect candidate.

See this video of the protests.

"Gali gali main shor hain, hamara VC chor hain".

Any self-respecting person would resign after such scenes.

https://x.com/bhk_shubham/status/1969735454653092204

"The club isn't the best place to find a lover

So the bar is where I go"

Hello lovely people of Legallyindia!

I'm an A0 in the city of Mumbai. As you read in the title, I don't know many people in this city and want to find a people outside office. As an 23M, I don't get a lot of options on dating apps but can be confident speaker face to face.

What's the goto place for an A0 to socialise and approach someone. I work in Fort area and can spend about 500-1000 on a weekend.

Help out your junior here :)

As someone who has done litigation, trust me do not go for it as you'll regret it. For the first year or two, you'll only have to wait around in court seeking adjournments and passovers and while you waste your time in the morning, you'll have to make up for it in by sitting in a dusty chamber till night drafting applications and preparing for the next day' cases all the while getting paid less. Even if you choose to move to a firm later on, you will not be on the same par as your other classmates in firms as they would've been working on huge transactions and gained significant experience and learning. It's better to join a t1 as an a0 as soon as you can cz people will cut you slack for being a fresher but if you come with experience, you'll be held to higher standards. I wouldn't recommend litigation unless you have a godfather.

A senior adv in bombay hc once told me something along the following line "Litigation is a marathon, only the people with the strongest resolve last. Most people will leave. Unless you have ZERO doubts - do not join litigation. Even if you have zero doubts, they might come up later. However, having doubts right now is a VERY GOOD indicator that you should probably not invest everything into litigation"

I think you should intern w the adv till you have to join your T1 firm. Tell noone of this internship. and if by then you have zero doubts - join. If you join your T1 job

https://www.barandbench.com/Law-School/bits-law-school-appoints-former-cji-uu-lalit-as-honorary-professor-of-law

A retired CJI joined private college

Hey, thanks for informing! So if the team doesn't sit in BLR office, then how to maximize the chances of getting a PPO and callback?? Since you have experience, please let us know and give any tips. Please, that'd be really helpful!! How's BLR office and what's the work culture - the Do's and Don'ts?? Please inform as much as possible. Thank you!!

Oh man!
Let me break that for you.
I work in a ministry, and not just bureaucrats, but all the officers here enjoy a high-class life. They all live in Lutyans, enjoy high-class parties, visit different countries for bilateral/multilateral negotiations, represent the ministry/country on multinational forums, etc. I am talking about clean officers who do not get involved in corrupt practices. If you factor in their salary as well as other benefits (which we have to pay for), an officer with 10 years of experience easily enjoys benefits of around 30-35 lakhs. It might not be enough for most of us, but they reach home by 6:30 on most days.

5-6 cr is peanuts. 20 years into practice, the same person if they were successful in litigation would be earning atleast twice of that. if a rainmaker, then even more. All the stuff you said which can be ONLY be accessed through alaw firm career? Rubbish. Anyone in litigation would be earning far more, with much more satsiforactory work and no clerical work like that in a firm, and afford/access the same.

You seem to be living in a delusion where you think that the work these glorified clerks who go by the misnomer corporate lawyers have any value addition to the field of law, or that you do anything that requires the application of what is called brains, but I guess such classes would not understand that, for they have already chosen or were misguided into choosing a clerical "job".

First, law is a profession and there cannot be jobs there. The fact that you glorified clerks consider it to be a job speaks volumes about you all. Second, why is law called a noble profession, and who are the most well known lawyers? The ones in litigation, of course. Even our freedom fighters, a good majority of law makers in the pre and post independence era, were lawyers who practiced law instead of doing clerical work that you all do. Someone/some people have already addressed your misunderstanding of the figures of the income of lawyers, so no point in raising that, other than asking you a very simple question - how many of the A0s, or whatever term you clerks use to describe the menial job you do, end up becoming partners? Your attrition rate is so high, its laughable. The sort of work that you do - in desks in shiny offices, are similar to any other desk job. You have no USP of your own other than the fact that you all go around telling people that you are corporate lawyers.

Y'all negotiate and draft transactions? Have global exposure? Sure - you can call it to be whatever instead of clerical work. I'll put in what you people fail to realise - you are like a coffee machine. A coffee machine, produces alot of things - coffee of various types, that is. Ofc, someone can make their own coffee without it, but they use it for the convenience. That's what you people are. Coffee machines. Just some convient bunch of clerks making coffee and doing nothing. Some clients are indeed crooks and as such litigators have to run behind fees, but overall, even if they don't realise those fees, they'd still be outearning what you clerks earn. Yes, you people have stability. But guess what? With that stability, there comes a stability in your work too - the same clerical work that you and seem to be so proud of. A clerk or a xerox machine operator in a lawyer's office/court neighbourhood contributes more than what you do.

No point in responding to the personal attacks you make because that's what you clerks are capable of doing when not doing your clerical job.

You say the difference between corp law and litigation is that of delivery? and because litigators deliver/articulate well and hence they're good at performance, which is not a proof of legal wisdom? This. The sheer lack of knowledge shows that you are in corporate law. Only stupid people who have no idea how things work can say such things. To any person, if they are to name any lawyer, who would they name? The ones in litigation. These are the same people who defend your rights and have carved jurisprudence. These are the same people who have contributed to judgements which you people sometimes apply to your clerical work. Please don't insult litigation by saying that its a performance of law. You people have zero contribution towards law, have no role in law, and just do clerical work within a set template. That's the reality.

On a side note - aside from all these fights and debates, may I offer you a genuine piece of advice? A very neutral one indeed. Please don't do corporate law. You will ruin your life there doing clerical work. If you want to do law, do real work - get into litigation.

you honestly have made the point that this person was making. On money, and on growth trajectory. Yes, corporate lawyers have a clearer growth trajectory, but let's be clear - their work is hardly intellectually stimulating and worth anything. Second, on the finance aspect, sir, with the deepest of respect, you see right there - 3-4 Cr or even 8-10cr p.a. That amount, to any other reasonable person, would be alot. But in relation to an equally successful lawyer in litigation? That's peanuts. Just peanuts. In addition, in litigation, multiple posts of honour come up - judges of HC/SC, AG, SG, etc. etc, and at the very least, a senior gown. What do you get in corporate law? Nothing. A shiny corner office with a nice view, which any other successful person in a different field would also have. Corporate law is nothing but clerical work.

A lot actually. A lot of things have changed in the past 5 years or so. I am aware of people with 8 PQE making 50+. Plus now the entire game has shifted due to ESOPs, stock grants etc.

For example - A Google L4 corp lawyer can earn anywhere around 80 lakhs (including stock grants). This post requires 6 years PQE

Coming to startups - Partner level PQE (10+) people usually head the department or are one down. If they head the department (GC or head of legal) then easily expect 1 CR +. For better companies, GC earnings can cross 5 CRs as well (check out Swiggy, zomato etc. through their DRHP filings)

Tech startups pay the most. And you can work and negotiate non stop. If you do actually work and make yourself indispensible then sky is the limit. I am constantly offered 40-50% hikes by companies ( I have 4 years PQE, and currently earning the same as A3 Tier 1)

The best thing. No drama, good work life balance and you actually step outside the mundane law profiles and learn everything like business, marketing, HR, strategy, product designs and implementations etc. That is what keeps us going. Yes we also do doc reviews and redlining as part of our BAU but advisory work is where you can shine.

Not taking any shots and strictly my personal opinion but I regularly engage tier 1 law firms for legal opinions etc. Trust me when I say that a decent intellectual in House counsel always outshines a similarly experienced law firm associate. I have seen that time and again and that's why I have stayed away from law firms.

Per hour we are paid more. After 10-12 years, the pay disparity is almost negligible. You can always grab the chance to be on the ground floor of a start up or a pre ipo company and get retirement grade stock options (My previous GC cashed in around 90 crores after the IPO).

Yes a lot of them actually. You will have to be on the corporate advisory side of things though. Tech companies and start ups are your best bet.

I am in a crypto start up with 4.5 years of experience and the pay is equal to tier 1 A3. But yes I come and go as I want and there is hardly any work on weekends. (Although I do spend 12 + hours most of the time because I love the work)

The hint is in your own post! ▮▮▮? The word "priliminary" has a meaning. ▮▮▮: that means there are no updates at this stage. This isn't a game. Peoples' lives actually get changed by these things. Please stop treating them as games. Legally India, remove this post. Have a new one created when the final list is out.

From what I have seen and heard, Sagus is not a supportive place to build a career. The environment is often discouraging, policies shift without clarity, and compensation is not in line with industry standards. The disputes team has been especially difficult for juniors.

▮▮▮

Then in most situations you will be allowed Repeat Exam (maybe different nomenclature in ur uni), In Repeat a suffix -R will be mentioned to indiciate that you took Repeat Exam. But, some NLU's have rules they will treat treat repeat as your first attempt (and suffix -R will be not be mentioned) if you had not given Endterms for medical reasons/ moots, seminars/university prog/ other similar grounds deemed fit by VC.

Again ask the Faculty/Exam Dept/Uni website for the rules

Let us first understand this entire situation as a lawyer. First, Why are you students demanding his resignation even if its an 'allegation' of sexual assault? As students of law you must know that mere allegation without any stronghold evidence does not hold any good in the eyes of law. Today you as students are protesting based on an allegation, in future, you all are going to hold high offices; if someone brings any allegation against you, would you want your junior colleagues or students to run to the streets demanding your resignation. At first, a person must be presumed innocent unless proven guilty. Sadly we forget that.

Second, as lawyers don't you all think that the SC erred in its decision to include the allegation in his resume, evenif it was a mere allegation? How can you, as law students, not question the decision of the Apex Court when it ordered the inclusion of an "allegatio"n in his Resume, even when it was never proved as sacrosanct. As students of NUJS we should also think about it.

Third, you all are 'frustrated' with the lack financial transparency in his tenure. Why has no RTI been filed demanding for such transparency??

Fourth, "systematic pattern of administrative failure" is highly subjective as it is too wide enough to understand the series of events which led to such exasperation. As students of law dont you think that you should have categorically enlisted those demands and claimed that with all logic and your legal acumen?

As prospective lawyers such questions must be clear in the minds of our young students, otherwise it would simply mean beating the drums with others without even applying your own legal acumen behind it.

Kindly ask these questions to the students protesting.

Former associate here: The management has been repeatedly informed by several outgoing associates about bad seniors who cause attrition in the specific teams, but no action has been taken. The HR doesn't even pretend to try to check why associates are 'actually' quitting in the teams with extreme attrition. Bottom line: They don't care so long as the partners keep rolling in the cash.