Not worth it at all. Corporate teams are equally bad. No learning, no growth, no interesting work. Just obnoxious seniors and partners. They pay the least among tier 1 and less than some non-tier 1 firms as well.

Ridiculous rating systems. You can work and kill yourself entire year but simply because your senior may want to put you at 5m rating and not 5h, you will not get full bonus. It is as subjective. They will not think twice to make you work on weekends and holidays and you being a naive associate, will continue to do everything on the hopes that you will atleast get full bonus after working so hard. But that also is not assured. Then you will hear this stupid speech from your senior that 90% bonus is not bad. Why should I be paid less if I have worked hard throughout the year.

Everyone worth working with has either left or is on his/her way out. If you have no other option, of course take it but if there are any other tier 1 options, please don't join this place.

1. Yes, absolutely this is awesome news! An unexpected good thing. This is the thing with the Americans and British: they will play around with parts of systems that you least expect them to play around with! Previous quota for government officials? Serious thumbs down. Declaration of ineligibility for government officials now? Also thumbs down, however. Too blanket.

2. The voting pattern clearly shows:

▮▮▮

Hi, I have been in the same boat as you and let me tell you it’s completely possible to switch over. I relate with your situation because sometimes tough hours and unfavourable work circumstances can bring out the not so good aspects of our personalities but here are a couple of things you can try to improve your chances: -

1. Try to reach out to seniors/ people working in the potential firm and see if you can get an idea about the interviewers, line of questioning etc.

2. For personality questions- Have a narrative ready. No robotic answers.

3. Since I interviewed for the M&A practice area, I am not the right person to advise you on the technical front but drafting a very succint CV and defining my limited role from the beginning of the interview helped me ease into the conversation.

4. There is no substitute for confidence so you will have to really push yourself mentally also to convince the hirer of your potential.

5. I used a lot of resources from law firm publications, Khaitan’s M&A course on YT etc and tried to steer the convo towards the tasks that I knew I did well at.

Finally, don’t be disappointed and keep going! There are some factors which are truly beyond your control so only reflect on things you can change! All the best to you :)

It was written 3 years ago by me. I have got into judiciary and now undergoing training.

I still am open to idea of appearing for UPSC and have started preparing. Its okay, if i dont clear and its also okay if i dont find time for it!

But hey dont wanna regret that i didnt even take the plunge.

Bennett takes more fee and is led by the dean from sharda. So in a way it is worse than Sharda. I study here and there was an exodus of all good faculty from Bennett under his deanship leading to random hiring. Placements are poor. It started very well with good group and team. Maybe i wouldnt have said this 2 years back when i joined bennett..but now i wish i had joined sharda..Join sharda, if you have only two options.

I will let Dale Cooper answer that. “Harry, I'm going to let you in on a little secret: every day, once a day, give yourself a present. Don't plan it; don't wait for it; just let it happen. It could be a new shirt in a men's store, a catnap in your office chair, or two cups of good, hot, black, coffee.”

Mumbai's B&F cluster and Delhi's M&A cluster is the place to be after 6 - 9 years of Tier 1 law firm exposure; since the pay is commensurate with experience i.e. 40 - 55 lakhs instead of the shitty 14 lakh figure at A0 stage (when it is often difficult to grasp the complexity of what they do).

Even tier 2s like Bharucha, DSK, Veritas etc. match TT&A's A0 bands after year 1 base with bonuses (for top performers) so I hope the A0 pay gets hiked per se.

"There are other countries in which one can do an equally good, if not better, LLM" : Hi I am an LLM aspirant and it would be very helpful if you could elaborate a bit more on this. I may be wrong but from my research online, many applicants ( For example: Law Clerks, Associates) do an LLM at Columbia/Harvard/Georgetown after having 1-2 years of work experience and are easily able to move laterally into US law firms/in-house roles in the US/UK.

It would be very helpful if you could provide a bit more clarity maybe if you do know more about other LLM degrees like Bucerius, Leiden etc pls do send in your thoughts!

Possibly. Actually, I'd go further and say, very likely (it would certainly be so if I were the Columbia administration). In any case, I'd take this as redirection rather than as a source of dejection. Doing an LLM in the U.S. is anyway unhelpful, in the sense that your chances for employment there (either as a legal practitioner or academic) are not improved at all compared to not doing one. So your time could be better employed doing something else. There are other countries in which one can do an equally good, if not better, LLM (I am no mindless patriot, so not including India in this, because our graduate level legal education is not worth writing home to mother about for other reasons). Those countries have equally good, if not in some cases better, faculty, resources and postgraduate law study culture than the U.S., who anyway view the LLM students in their unis with the same level of contempt that the NLUs in India do for their LLM students. I wouldn't shed too many tears over this, TBH.

Also, if you need any further reasons not to be too sad over this, I can tell you from detailed knowledge of the U.S. system that LLM students can be at an immense intellectual disadvantage in their universities, anyway. Take just one example: the Philosophy of Public Property seminar that Seana Shiffrin takes at UCLA. One constituency of students for this class is LLM students in Legal Philosophy, true. But that's a very small constituency. The other constituencies include: JD students and PhD students in the Department of Philosophy (remember, UCLA isn't a stand-alone law school like NLSIU, for example, so it has multiple degree-awarding faculties). All these other constituencies (JD and Philosophy PhD) of students have better philosophical training than at least most Indian law students going there (to the U.S., that is) for an LLM. Combine that with the curve grading policy that many Indian universities have copied from the Americans, the complexity of content for a seminar like this and you get a recipe of high chances of not being able to do well. Tell me, considering just one career - academia and considering if you wanted to do that abroad: taking other factors into account (difficulties for getting selected to an SJD (U.S. law PhD programme), these structural disadvantages in the LLM environment, the fact that SJD graduates (even from the best American universities) are basically never hired in the U.S.), why would you even want to go to a system that disadvantages you at every turn, even if they are giving you some faltu (in the larger scheme of things) financial aid amount to study? Seems to me like the disadvantages outweigh the advantages (speaking as someone who has benefitted from LLM-level teaching in a country that is neither the U.S. nor India from someone who did both an LLM and SJD from Yale).

You seem to imply here that a think tank is not really autonomous if it agrees or helps with government policymaking. This is an unreasonable condition which emerges from a fundamental lack of trust in one’s own elected representatives. A think tank is there to offer its expertise. Nothing more, nothing less. Sometimes, its ideas will find supporters in the government and sometimes they won’t. How its leadership manages its relationship with the government is their call. And none of that denotes partisanship. Also, to say that CPR was ever an independent think tank is to betray one’s own ignorance of its founding history. It was essentialy one of those ICSSR institutes whose job largely comprised doing impact assessments of government policies; hardly rigorous work. When PB Mehta joined, he made it a more professional and intellectually diverse place, but not necessarily neutral. CPR has done good work but in deciding to join Hasdeo movement (the details of which are admittedly sketchy) it put itself in a spot with the Indian state. In a statist society like India, nothing can survive that is in an adversarial position against the government. Consider other think tanks like Institute of Economic Growth, Centre for Development Studies, Centre for Studies in Social Sciences, etc. << https://icssr.org/research-institutes-0 >>. They all occasionally do interesting work. But none of them can survive by explicitly rejecting the consensus of the Indian developmental state and whose authority is backed by its democratic, albeit imperfect, politics.

Honestly I’m so done with people who hate on vidhi. It just smacks of envy of the influence and access vidhi has. But you’re not gonna get influence and access by being some ideological puritan. Why on earth should a duly elected government work with advocacy organisations that hate them ? Adult politics is all about working with people who disagree with you and finding common ground. Vidhi has done this very well. Name one policy space in India that has accomplished as much as vidhi!

It’s obviously without peer - and that comes from drafting policy documents and yes - sometimes telling a babu or a minister exactly what to say in a speech.

I am a final year student, most probably getting retained as an inhouse legal employee in a non-tech startup after my traineeship. But work environment is stagnant and toxic (Basically i wouldn't take it if i had offer from corporate firms/ policy institutes, but my CPI is bad). Also there isn't much to learn, drafting agreements and compliance work.

Since i get a lot of free time in work and only 2 day work from office, is there any possibility that i can try learning litigation side by side or policy maybe (i have interest in tech policy).

Also There is a rule that i can't practice in courts if am doing a job somewhere. so should i give the next AIBE exam or should give when i intent to practice in court.

WRONG INFO GUYS HAVE YOUR TALKED TNNLU STUDENTS, IN 2023 OUT OF 120 STUDENTS 43 STUDENTS HAVE BEEN PLACED IN THAT PPO IS 8 AND TRI LEGAL RECRUITED 8 STUDETNS, TNNLU IS COMING UP DESPITE BIASED GUIDANCE FROM PEOPLE LIKE YOU. SLS PUNE I HAVE A RELATION SAYS HOSTEL FACILITY SUCKS COMPARING TO THE HOSTEL FEE THEY CHARGE. I AGREE SLS PUNE IS GOOD INTERMS OF EXPOSURE AND ALL AND PLACEMENTS ALSO BUT DON'T TRY TO POTRAIT TNNLU IS SOME SHIT PARDON MY FRENCH

its a boutique IP Firm. they have trademark and patent work mostly. if you're not from a science background as an intern they wont give you much patent work. they give decent amount of work most of the time. work culture is nice. people are nice. i heard the starting they give is 15k. they probably also get from client billings. base is 15k for a fresher and A1 A2 is about 30-40 and 60-70 I believe. not sure about the A1 and A2

Tier 2 city expenses:

Rs 400 to 700 for movie plus popcorn and coke, more if you have gourmet popcorn. Add Uber fare.

Rs 600 to 900 for a basic pizza.

Clothes: 2,000 for a cheap-ass shirt.

GST on every fucking thing.

So how do you guys survive in Delhi and Mumbai on 1 lakh salaries? Seems like chicken shit to me even with the recent income tax exemptions.

Not the number of people placed, that is accurate. There are exactly 6 people still left who had signed up for placement from the beginning and have interned towards that goal. If someone wanted to study for the judiciary exam for example and didn't intern at any firm for four years, nor built up their CVs and all of a sudden they wake up before day zero and want to get placed in a T1 firm, then nobody can help them.

This isn’t the sort of thing that can be made mandatory. Private universities and NLUs charge students a fee called a moot court fee - it’s that money that’s used to reimburse fully or partially the expenses of teams. Government universities that do not charge such fees are under no obligation to pay for a moot.

The real issue boils down to only a handful seniors within the non TD camp. Why blame the entire bnf for the lack of self awareness amongst these handful seniors who are living in their own bubble and trying to make life miserable for people within their team and also around them.

The question you need to ask yourself is... Why ? If it's important then do it now, if not, then forget about it. People have gotten jobs with and without papers. The only place it's important is academia, and even there it's not mandatory, since some professors who's job depends on writing papers, haven't for a decade. So don't fret. Also, always remember, Quality>Quantity.