The bonus and increments were sad as shit and I think they used up all of it for their exclusive partners’ retreat at st regis in goa. Meritocracy, as they claim, is a myth; “we’ll make it up in 8%”, as they claim, is a myth. Pay disparity is so rampant; some freshers are getting paid more than the A1s because NLUs would ban them if the minimum pay wasn’t 8LPA. Some very hardworkers I know got 0% increment. Yes, 60,000 starting retainer with no appraisal is a very real situation and not a rumour. This firm claims to be a tier-1. Buying awards doesn’t confer this status to you. Get a grip before all the good resources jump ship.

Adding to this discussion, one big problem is that law entrance coaching centres present an unrealistic picture to law aspirants and their parents. They are told that if you get into any NLU or Jindal, or even Symbi or Bennett, you will get fantastic salaries.

I think the best career is actually running a law entrance coaching centre. Say a lot of shit and have zero accountability. Very good money too.

This problem is across the board / practices. It's not because of anything but the fact that Indians are promoted in the law firm setting way too fast which has massively increased cost pressure for firms and target pressure for individuals.

The rapid growth model made sense for law firms initially as they were gunning for size. But at some point, law firms need to stop and think if such large-scale growth is financially feasible. I personally don't think it is. When I joined law firms, a tier 1 would have 50 to 70 partners. This growth in size happened over more than 20 ish years. Less than 10 years later, firms have 150 to 200 ish partners. The rate of growth is insane. The rate of increase in non-partner strength is even greater.

I don't think we will see large scale layoffs, but we will see promotions being stretched out. I mean, we must also accept that something is weird in our system where our newly minted partners have less experience than associates at foreign law firms, both in the west and in the orient.

Having too many young partners sets the course for having incompetent partners. I do not mean they are incompetent in terms of work (while some are), but incompetent in terms of selling legal work to clients. Therefore, these new partners undercut severely to generate a "book" which spoils the market. Developing a book is a skill which takes time to develop. You cannot have associates working 15 hours 7 days a week for 9 / 10 years and all of a sudden ask them where is their book? When law firms do that, such newly minted partners are forced to undercut and get some chunk of the pie which in turn spoils the entire market. This increases financial pressure which trickles down.

Developing relationships in the market, which is a precursor to developing a book, takes time. Firms need to give that time, and that can only happen when law firms adopt a more feasible model. In the Indian context, the counsel model which KCO follows is currently the most sustainable model. However, if other firms keep dishing out the tag of partnership before its feasible, even KCO counsels will run. Anyways, even the KCO counsel model will run out of steam in a couple of years once there will be counsels in large numbers. The tenure for associates, SAs and PAs need to increase at least by 50% to 75%, if any meaningful change is to be seen in the ecosystem. Also, while the tenure for associates is extended, these resources need training on BD and personnel management over the years to become ready to be relevant partners who will not have to engage in bottom feeding or undercutting to sustain themselves.

If we cannot change the growth trajectory for individuals, firms will need to fire people to cull the herd. I do not think that is a solution anyone needs / wants. We need sustainability and not hunger games. But this is a truth, all lawyers need to internalize and not only law firm management.

And the above comment does not even take into account pressure imposed by "tier - lex [something] or similarly named" law firms who have set up shop because they couldn't take up the intense pressure of tier-1s. While much of those firms are shit, many are run by quality tier-1 trained resources. They have the ability to provide similar quality service at a fraction of the price. Big law firm models need to figure a way for sustainability to not lose out on these resources which invariably increase further upward pressure and unreasonable price competition. If culling the herd is a solution, similar law firms will not only rise in numbers but also in quality further complicating the issue. Where exits from one Amarchand Mangaldas gave rise to half a dozen tier 1s, imagine what exits from half a dozen tier 1s can do.

What we have is an industry wide issue. People need a reality check, but nobody wants one.

I know this comment is all over the place but wanted to vocalize a few quick thoughts. Someday, when I have time, will structure this better.

Answer is simple. Make legal education more relevant and rigorous. Abolish BALLB and have BBALLB or BScLLB as the standard course. Offer courses in hardcore finance, statistics, economics, calculus, econometrics, data science and data analysis. Offer weekly CAT/GMAT or CA/ICWA coaching, so that students can have more options after graduating. Also offer courses in spoken English, business communication, grooming and etiquette. Have workshops on entrepreneurship and starting a business The CLAT exam should have a 30% maths component, to filter out students accordingly.

Sorry to sound blunt, but wokeness is a luxury we cannot afford anymore.

He knows his practice area remarkably well.

His best quality is his availability and patience with his team. No matter where on earth he is, he is always available to resolve doubts and give instructions on his matters. He is yet to admonish anybody for asking silly questions, which seems to be something rare among most seniors I have worked with.

Regarding your academia point, list all TLC-educated professors at:

1. Oxford.

2. Cambridge.

3. The UoL unis (LSE, UCL, King's, QM and SOAS, in particular).

4. Other UK unis: Bristol, Warwick, Edinborough, Glasgow, Cardiff, Queen's Belfast, etc.

5. Toronto.

6. McGil.

7. Harvard.

8. Yale.

9. Columbia.

10. Brown.

11. NUS.

12. HKU.

13. And every other great university in the world.

It's not that judiciary prefers BHU. It's that like a typical sarkari college, a majority of students at BHU are studying to clear judiciary. RML has got more judiciary selections than NLU Delhi. Does not mean anything in the long run.

Students don't want to go for litigation not because no-one is taking them, but because they've paid so much fees and don't want to graind for half a decade establishing the practice.

Quoting from the petition:

"Savitribai Intersectional Study Circle at NALSAR (SISC), NALSAR Student Bar Council, NLS Savitri Phule Ambedkar Caravan (SPAC), NLS Student Bar Association, DSNLU Student Council, DNLU Student Bar Association, and NLIU Bhopal Savitri Phule Ambedkar Caravan (SPAC)."

Now let me give you a counter from the NLUX Friedman-Hayek Libertarian Student Caravan:

- You are fundamentally wrong to compare NLUs with IIT and IIM, because the latter received generous central government funding. Very curious how you leave out the central issue of NLU nationalisation, because that does not suit your political worldview.

- Paying ₹4,000 as exam fee is quite a reasonable ask. Also, reserved category students further receive a ₹500 discount in the counselling fee, as you note. Money does not grow on trees. Who is going to pay the shortfall if you further reduce the amount?

Please stop with the cringe virtue signalling.

NLUs should work towards securing funding from the state or demand to be nationalised, but they should not become a burden on students from poor financial backgrounds. The CLAT application fee of ₹4,000 is too high compared to other national-level exams. Can anyone justify how a person earning ₹10,000 a month is expected to pay 40% of that just for an application? And the counselling fee is even worse. Why are they charging ₹50,000 for counselling, with ₹20,000 being non-refundable? What is the point of such an expensive counselling process anyway? These fees, both application and counselling, are not even covered by any scholarships or student loans.

Hey LI Community,

I graduated from a private law college in 2024 and have been working in litigation since then. Over the past year, I've developed a solid foundation in Litigation, and I’m now looking to transition into corporate law or just join a law firm.

I understand it's difficult for a student from a private college, but I dream of being in a Tier-1/2 firm.

I’m open to relocating to Bangalore and would be really grateful for any advice, leads, or suggestions on how to make this shift, whether it's firms open to lateral hires, people to reach out to, or ways to build relevant experience.

Thanks in advance for your help!

This topic repeatedly keeps coming up on LI, which is a reflection of how frustrated first-generation, middle-class lawyers are. The bottom line is that you should not study law if you are not a nepo kid. Stick to STEM/MBA and go abroad, to meritocratic societies like the US, UK, EU, Australia, Singapore etc.

India is a country suitable only for the corrupt rich, plus votebank beneficiaries leeching off your taxes.

I was giving my PhD presentation on IP enforcement and I was asked to incorporate AI into my PhD. People felt that most of the infringements in future would be AI based, so my thesis has to be the same.

So, the world is changing. A lot of jobs are going to be obsolete in future. Courses should include AI developments into traditional laws as well.

M&A/PE is very competitive to get in as a fresher. Alot of law students are smart these days and they read on practice areas and understand that M&A is best from a long term perspective and provides best exit ops + money so the cream of top NLUs try to get into M&A teams and make them saturated. Try for cap marks/funds/banking/projects

Get the shirts, trousers, suits stitched by a tailor for your measurements. Choose premium cotton for shirts and wool blend for suits and trousers. Should cost you about 80k max.

A good dress watch that mimics the Cartier Santos but without the price tag, and a good sports watch should cost you about 60k for the both of them. Can't go wrong with Seiko.

Good black leather shoes about 5k.

Don't worry about brands. Choose aesthetics and taste.

1 suit: If you are in corporate/non-lit, get a suit stitched from Minizmo – around 30 K.

4 formal shirts: Get customizable shirts from Bombay Shirt Company – average cost around 5K. TOTAL – 20K.

1 pair of formal shoes: Check THE DAPPER MAN – average 7K + get a good belt and laptop bag. TOTAL: 15K.

1 watch: Don’t go bonkers – at around, 90K to 100K budget, you can get Longines (starting range), Junghans, Tissot (PRX Automatic), Nivada or Seiko.

I have gotten admission in both of them. I’ve gotten a 50% scholarship in BITS and will be paying around 6L (Tution or hostel) per year. At the same time, I have gotten symbiosis Noida, and will have to pay around 7.5L (including hostel).

Obviously BITSLAW is cheaper for me, but the catch is, I’m from NCR but my family is not residing here. They might come in a year or two though. In this situation, what would be a better option? Is any of them way better than the other one? Please help! A bit urgent

I mean people staying as owners, rather than tenants. Are they tier 1 senior advocates? Law firm owners? First generation HNIs from NLUs or legacy HNIs from blue-blood families? Are the husband and wife double-income earners and does that make a difference? Are many of them foreign returned, after practising in the US and UK?

You and I are never gonna live there, but just curious to know how people far above us in the hierarchy live!