Depends heavily upon where the office is. Anything not South Bombay is tolerable for you. Think ICUL in Andheri or a bunch of firms in BKC. If so, you can stay within 30-40 minutes of your office - either by can or train. If it's instead Nariman point or Lower Parel, you'll have to compromise heavily on your living expenses like rent, food etc. Maybe consider living in a PG or double-sharing room for the first year - even those would cost at least 20+5k, so that'll be more than a third of your in-hand salary - assuming 10LPA is fully fixed to begin with. So, think about how okay you are with saying an extended bye-bye to privacy and living in a matchbox of a room for the next few years - it's not that great an experience.

That said, if you're at that stage of life where you feel that this is the best foot forward for your career by a long margin, then of course those compromises may just be worth it.

Not really. Most other law schools have that system in place where more than one faculty teach the same batch. It's a simple case of scheduling the classes. The workload of any faculty can remain unchanged. Instead of taking say four classes with one section, they will take two classes with each of two sections. The same will be done by the other faculty. It's not really complicated. Even Sudhir doesn't have any problem with the logistics, he is however in principle opposed to the idea. I am not the person who commented above and I believe that it is a policy decision more than anything else. However, I also think that it is a matter for the administration to decide. Students may raise objections and then engage in a dialogue with the administration if this is what they want. Honestly, I don't think that most of the issues that students have with Sudhir and vice versa would remain if they engage in regular conversations with each other in good faith. Sudhir isn't illogical and nor are the other faculty, so not sure why this communication breakdown has happened.

I just wish to add to points articulated by people earlier. This is what a good university education is supposed to feel like, not just at times, but often. That's how you are hugely encouraged to push yourself to your limits, and beyond them, redefining your limits.

One of the most commonly-understood cultural things about the world's finest universities, like Oxford, is that even people who would have been the cream of the cream elsewhere struggle, and find it hard from time-to-time to keep their heads above water. NLSIU doesn't have the imposing spires or any of the other elements of Oxford's grand architecture, which, combined with hard work, can really sometimes be scary for lots of students and make them question themselves, but you have the same essentials that Oxford does (including Oxford-educated faculty). Embrace this feeling, put your head down and kick out even harder to make sure you are staying afloat; when you do come up outside, you will know you did something significant, and so will the rest of the world.

Regarding a point that was made about academic standards being lower before and yet people winning the Rhodes, it's not as black-and-white as some people think. One of the 2018 Rhodes scholars, Rahul Bajaj, who is blind, chose to study in his hometown of Nagpur, rather than going to an NLU, at a uni with some of the shittiest academic standards. As he himself says, while his accomplishments even in that shitty environment were significant on an absolute basis but also relatively, compared to other students in better environments, he found it easier to crack one of the key elements of a Rhodes application - top grades - because of what passed for academic standards at his uni. He has expressly said that if he'd gone to a better uni, the competition he would have had to face internally for Rhodes would have been much stiffer. You are getting the opportunity that really smart people like him (he won awards for his work in Oxford during the BCL and passed his MPhil Thesis with Distinction and No Corrections) would sacrifice arms and legs for. Instead of constantly complaining, make the most of that. You were given the opportunity because you were the cream of the cream elsewhere. This is your chance to show us that you are the cream of the cream among cream of creams from lots of places.

Best of luck; I look forward to hearing of your (i) achieving the Rhodes/some other equally significant scholarship/LLM admission with internal-to-specific-uni scholarship, in a few years' time; and (ii) after you have absolutely drouned yourself in significant work in commercial law in the next twenty years or so (minimum twelve hours a day of work + almost no weekends off), coming out with an equity partnership at Kirkland under your belt and a salary we dare not mention (at which time you will thank Sudhir on bended knee for what he put you through as a kid).

OP’s question: “Why Trash Instagram, Hate on Indian Men, & Diss India on Independence Day?”

My answer: Because that’s easier to do than attack Mamata Banerjee and the TMC, or call out the hypocrisy of her celebrity, cocktail party circuit MPs like Mahua Moitra and Sagarika Ghose.

Well the issue is people like you only taking away the crime from the incident. Perpetrators ko arrest karo, convict, punish. Done?. Okay wait for another incident another year.

Not to mention the medical report stated it was a gang rape and only one guy has been caught. Also vandalism by state goons. Well documented.

We women have been facing probably less heinous sexual offences on a daily basis in India. Catcalling, harassment, touching, even in our so called NLUs. The thing to take away is the general disrespect of women's boundaries, which is definitely a global thing, but noticeably lesser in other countries like the US and UK. Having been there, there is a little more respect and less sexual offences. Also victim blaming by authorities and refusal to register cases is also way lesser (corruption). There are CCTV and way other protections there, missing in India. Imagine a hospital ward not having a CCTV lol.

This statement struck a chord with me profoundly. A college friend's wife (a working woman) recently posted that she wouldn't trust her daughter with "any man." Considering the depth of our friendship, her statement left me pondering. If her standard is so absolute—excluding "any man"—who then, in a critical situation, qualifies as a trustworthy guardian for her child? Does this imply that any woman would inherently be a more reliable custodian than any man? This broad generalization is troubling, and as an Indian man, I find this pervasive negativity exhausting.

I am of decent height. About 5'10 (male). Neither tall or short. However, I have a really hard time taking shorter men seriously at a law firm. My automatic reaction looking at a short man in a law firm is that he is overcompensating for his lack of height by being extra loud or macho or trying to act as if he's the next Palkhivala. When I look at them speaking it's hard to take them seriously or not laught internally at them. How to eliminate this prejudice?

Agree 100%. GLC's only claim to fame (if any) is its location. Other than that it is a very ordinary law college, known only for historical reasons. If anyone cites the few illustrious alumni that GLC has produced, that is because GLC has been around for a few decades, and for many of those it was the only option if anyone wanted to pursue law.

Maharashtra lacks a "top law college". GLC Mumbai and ILS Pune continue to survive only because of historical reasons and GLC for location. SLSP does not really count being a private university. No one takes them seriously despite some hype around it. The three MNLUs are still struggling to find their feet. Maharashtra (just like Karnataka) lacks good state universities. All institutions that do well in the NIRF are central institutes - IITB, IIM Mumbai, IIM Nagpur, AIIMS Nagpur, NIFT (in Maharashtra), and IISc, IIMB, ISI, NID, NIMHANS, and NIFT (in Karnataka), the only exception being NLSIU. In both states, the local boards (PUC in Karnataka) and (JC in Maharashtra) are of low quality and perceived to be very easy. In fact, in both states, many ICSE and CBSE students shift to state boards after Class 10 just to score higher marks in Class 12 putting in less effort. Their low quality permeates the entire state education system.

This is the post. Written in 2018 but still 100% relevant today. https://www.lawctopus.com/not-join-lower-ranked-national-law-university-nlu-instead/

Not demotivating you, but it can be a possibility that you aren't able to match skill set of someone who has pradeep rai, ak bhambri, because once you get a T-1 internship, if you are extremely good, they'll offer you a PPO, but if you did average and then someone is from a top 5 NLU with a good academic record, they'll be preferred above you, that's the reality. If you are seeing people with not so reputed college getting a PPO despite having bad internships ( they must be bringing in some business through connections) that's why they got the job

The coverage is neither sexist nor patriarchal. It is just idiotic and lacking in all journalistic standards and ethics. In fact Newslaundry in the above piece itself have linked to another of their articles where they found the media doing the same thing to Neeraj Chopra during the previous Olympics.

I am fascinated by the man. Does he regularly appear / argue in matters before the SC or any other court? How/why did he get designated by the Guwahati HC? How does he finance his lifestyle? What do juniors in his office do? I know he's well connected to the ruling establishment, but hasn't waded into politics yet (which kind of seems the ideal thing for him to do, given his profile)

I don't think it's fair to name anyone just yet. You never know. Having said that, there are some very bright juniors in these colleges–people who've already demonstrated great writing skills, mooting abilities at the international level, great grades, winning negotiations, (all of the above?), etc.

Just as British-era engineering colleges gave way to IITs and faded away, so too GLC is giving way to NLUs and fading away. GLC can be revived only if it is designated as an NLU and upgraded. Example: Roorkee is older than IIT, but lost out to the IITs. Then it got upgraded to an IIT and improved. Similar story with BHU (now IIT BHU), Bengal Engineering College (nationalised as IIEST) and ISM Dhanbad (now IIT-ISM).

But the big problem is that an MNLU has already been set up. It was stupid of Maharashtra not to designate GLC as MNLU — excellent alumni and location. Maybe the two can be merged?