India’s legal education landscape has transformed substantially over the past few decades, primarily with the establishment of National Law Universities (NLUs). Regarded as the gold standard, NLUs are elite institutions that admit students based on the highly competitive Common Law Admission Test (CLAT). Only a fraction of applicants secure admission, creating an aura of exclusivity around NLU graduates. Yet, this perception often leads to biases against students from other law schools, categorizing them as less competent despite their potential. The reality is far more complex, as many talented students outside of NLUs face socio-economic barriers or narrowly miss the CLAT cut-off, while still possessing the skills to excel in the legal profession.

In February 2023, Chief Justice of India (CJI) DY Chandrachud addressed the convocation at NALSAR University, urging NLU students to respect their peers from other law schools. He emphasized the need for humility, cautioning against a sense of superiority based solely on institutional affiliation. Justice Chandrachud also acknowledged the challenges NLUs face in making legal education accessible to diverse socio-economic backgrounds, a gap that reinforces inequity in the legal field.

In July 2024, the Supreme Court again highlighted these challenges in Gaurav Kumar v. Union of India, where CJI Chandrachud and Justice JB Pardiwala acknowledged the barriers non-NLU graduates face. The judgment underscored that students from marginalized communities or those lacking an NLU degree often encounter discrimination in elite law firms, senior lawyer chambers, and other prestigious roles, all of which are critical for establishing a career in law. The judgment reaffirmed the need to dismantle institutional biases and called for a more inclusive approach to legal hiring.

The “Modern-Day Untouchability” in Law

In India’s legal job market, non-NLU students are often sidelined, treated almost as “untouchables” by many recruiters who gravitate towards the NLU brand. Despite having comparable skills, determination, and legal acumen, these students find doors closed to prestigious law firms, judicial clerkships, and corporate roles simply because they don’t hold an NLU tag. This bias, deeply rooted in institutional elitism, overlooks individual talent and reinforces an unfair hierarchy

NLUs account for approximately 3,000 seats annually across India, while the country’s broader network of law schools produces over 80,000 graduates each year, with non-NLU students making up the overwhelming majority. Yet, the “NLU-only” mindset fosters an elitism that permeates legal hiring, often translating into biased recruitment practices favoring pedigree over talent. For example, In 2014 graduates from a single National Law School held 26% of partnership positions in India’s top six corporate law firms, despite abundant talent from other law schools.

Non-NLU students often face institutional discrimination, facing rejection from top firms and judges’ chambers solely due to their alma mater. This pervasive “brand bias” not only reduces diversity within the profession but also limits the range of perspectives that can enrich legal practice.

Access to NLUs is heavily reliant on the CLAT, an entrance examination that has been criticized for creating structural barriers. In 2024, around 60295 students competed........

© Kashmir Observer