Blog

Neha Rathi, an Advocate on Record at the Supreme Court of India, brings a distinctive perspective to litigation shaped by her early training in journalism and a sustained commitment to issues of public importance. Her legal journey from London School of Economics to the corridors of Supreme Court is deeply rooted in constitutional values, human rights and public interest litigation. In this conversation, she reflects on her shift from journalism to law, her formative years in litigation, landmark constitutional matters, and the role of writing and public discourse in influencing legal thought and public policy.

This interview has been published by Anshi Mudgal and The SuperLawyer Team

What first drew you towards law despite having an academic background in Journalism? 

My purpose was always to work on issues of public importance. Writing was and continues to be my first love. But I realised that I could continue to write while also being a lawyer, but I won’t be able to practice law while being a full time journalist. Another thing that drew me to law as a subject were concepts of equality, liberty, secularism, justice which are essentially what make the Indian Constitution “a grand experiment” and I was keen to dive deep into these concepts. Soon after joining Campus Law Centre at the Delhi University, I also realised I enjoyed the academic rigour, the case law format of teaching & litigation and my interest in law developed further.

What was it about Human Rights law that made you pursue masters at LSE and how did the exposure prove beneficial for you? 

During my journalism studies and later at law – the subjects I was most interested in were Constitutional Law, Gender Justice, Environmental Law, International law and the like. So the decision to specialise in human rights law came naturally. By the time I applied, I had already interned with Delhi based human rights organizations, and was writing on issues which concerned the marginalised or the environment and so I felt an LL.M with human rights law as my main subject would further equip me for my future endeavours. 

Studying at LSE, attending public lectures by experts in different fields, the London experience, as it were, opened many doors for me. Immediately after my LLM (since I was still in two minds about getting into litigation) I received an international fellowship by the Women’s Health Initiative at Harvard University. It took me straight from London Streets to by-lanes of Dharavi and Govandi in Mumbai and little hamlets in Thane district, where I interviewed women on issues of reproductive rights. Later I worked as a consultant for the New York based Centre for Reproductive Rights for close to two years which took me to Tanzania and the Philippines. So it was after 3 years of grassroots work that I decided to start practicing law full-time and see if it was meant for me or if I was meant to be a litigating lawyer.

In the initial years of your practice, what were the experiences that strengthened your approach towards litigation? 

I feel I must have been the most reluctant lawyer that ever set foot in court. I had the rookie reluctance to wear a band and a gown, I didn’t understand the procedure, everything seemed too structured – which my vagabond heart was yet to accept as my professional self. But with time as and when I started handling important cases in my initial years such as drafting of the petition challenging the electoral bond scheme, seeking directions that political parties must be brought under the Right to Information, challenging the approvals given for hydro-power projects in Alaknanda river and various other corruption cases in different states, my approach to litigation and its impact gained ground.

I started my journey in litigation with Mr. Prashant Bhushan – it was quite an obvious choice really- given his body of work in public interest. His approach to law as a means to bring about change, his ability to speak truth to power and knack for looking at issues no matter how complex from a first principles perspective – gave me confidence to carry on.

What was that turning point in your life that motivated you to pursue the AOR qualification and how did you prepare for it? 

Since I don’t come from a family of lawyers, becoming an AoR in itself felt like a big feat. I still value it, as AoRs perform a very important role at the Supreme Court. It was much later that I realised that there are advocates who simply aim at being arguing counsels at the Supreme Court bypassing the AoR route!

About the AoR exam- I attended the AoR lectures delivered by Sr. Advocates which were quite informative. Subjects such as Professional Ethics and Leading Cases are quite enriching and must be studied by all lawyers, regardless of the exam. I think what helped crack the exam in my first attempt was the fact that I was already working at a Chamber, where I was drafting petitions and filing them on a daily basis.

What has been the most challenging case you’ve handled so far and how did you prepare for it?

I think the ongoing challenge to the Election Commission’s Special Intensive Revision (SIR) Order has been and continues to be the most challenging case I have handled so far. As Court appointed Nodal Counsel, I had to coordinate with the entire petitioner side (comprising at least 25-30 petitions or more) which meant preparing convenience compilations for the court which is a huge task in itself, drafting written submissions, preparing for my own brief where I represented Mahua Moitra, briefing multiple seniors on important aspects of election law concerning this case. What sets this case apart is also the fact that throughout the last 6 months this case has been heard at short intervals, multiple applications were filed by us and heard as the process continued and various important interim orders were passed by court.

Having two hundred published articles in national newspapers and magazines, how do you think contributing to academic discourse and public policy enhances a lawyer’s perspective? 

For me, writing has never been very distinct from legal practice, it is another way of engaging with the law – it requires a similar kind of clarity of thought, rigour and accountability, albeit the structure and audience may be different. I think it is a lawyer’s job to stay abreast with what is happening around her and attempt to add to the existing pool of knowledge. The written word has its own charm and its own impact and it is up to a lawyer to bridge the gap or join the dots between the law as it is and what it can be or should be and present it in a way that any reader, not necessarily lawyers, would find interesting. 

With your current empanelment and your role as an AOR, how do you see the future of your practice evolving, and what aspirations do you have for it? 

I feel I still have a long way to go as I am now 10 years into the profession, which in the legal field is not a very long time. I realise not having a family background in law or contacts high up the ladder deprives one of certain opportunities- but at the same time – the profession also takes care of your finances. I just want to continue to do more work and  gain more experience in all fields of practice, not only PILs. In my limited experience, I have seen that work begets work, one well-drafted well-argued case begets many more, so long as one is honest to one’s profession and genuinely thinks for a better result for one’s clients, word of mouth can keep one’s office running. 

What advice would you offer to students who wish to build a career like yours and reach significant heights in litigation? What resources would you recommend? 

My advice to law students who are yet to embark in the world of litigation would be to take up internships with advocates in different courts. An internship offers exposure to real-world litigation and helps identify both one’s interests and disinclinations. Another advice would be to learn to read judgments and bare acts early on. In fact, whether it’s law books or a history book or simple fiction, especially classics, any and all reading helps one get a deeper insight into the human mind, conflict and resolution. Don’t be afraid to ask questions, most fellow lawyers and seniors actually like to guide young lawyers. I have very often sought quick advice on a case from senior advocates even in court corridors, and they have been more than happy to guide me. For resources, I think reading the newspaper, taking subscription to publications such as livelaw etc and being updated about what is happening in courts, around the world or in your own neighbourhood, and how it impacts those around you – makes you a more informed, empathetic, discerning person, and definitely a better lawyer. 

Get in touch with Neha Rathi –

Careers in litigation are often shaped as much by circumstances as by choice. Dhruv Chawla, Advocate practising before the Supreme Court of India and the High Court of Delhi,  shares how an early personal experience redirected him from an entirely different dream turning uncertainty into conviction. From discovering the intellectual thrill of courtroom to gaining early independence and responsibility, this interview traces how the foundations of litigation are built through experience, exposure and evolving motivation.

This interview has been published by Anshi Mudgal and The SuperLawyer Team

What inspired you to choose litigation as a career, and how did your early years shape your journey?

My entry into litigation and law itself was entirely unplanned. I had aspired to become a fighter pilot, but being conferenced out of the AFSB at Dehradun was a deeply disappointing moment and marked a significant personal setback. Law began as a backup option. However, in hindsight, it turned out to be one of the greatest blessings in disguise. What I did not realise then was that the legal profession would allow me to channel the same sense of purpose, discipline, and desire to contribute meaningfully to the nation, albeit in a very different way.

If I look deeper, what truly drew me to litigation was the aspiration to be in a position of relevance and responsibility, where one sees issues closely, understands systemic realities, and can influence outcomes, whether directly through judgments or indirectly through policy shaping litigation. That sense of being a stakeholder in the country’s institutional growth strongly anchored my decision to pursue the profession more seriously.

Interestingly, inspiration in litigation is not static; it evolves with each phase of one’s career. The initial motivation was driven by idealism. In my early years, it transformed into the sheer thrill of arguing in court, the nerves, the unpredictability of proceedings, and the intellectual adrenaline of live advocacy. After moving to Delhi in 2018, I was fortunate to join a chamber that entrusted juniors with substantial responsibility and autonomy. Being encouraged to handle matters independently, build cases from the ground up, and see them through instilled early confidence. This exposure played a pivotal role in shaping my independence as a litigator and gave me the conviction to begin representing clients on my own at a relatively early stage.

What were the biggest learning experiences you had while handling complex matters at higher judicial forums in your early practice?

One of my core strengths has always been the ability to absorb and internalise skills from the people I observe and engage with, both directly and indirectly. In the initial years of my practice, opportunities to independently argue complex matters before higher judicial forums were understandably limited. However, I made the most of that phase by keenly observing senior advocates and seasoned practitioners, how they structured arguments, read the Bench, built narratives, and manoeuvred through difficult moments during hearings.

Closely observing these stalwarts was a learning experience in itself. Often, the real insight lay between the lines, understanding strategic pauses, calibrated concessions, or tactical shifts that helped them navigate seemingly unfavourable situations. One of the most valuable lessons I learnt during this phase came from one of my seniors and mentors, Mr. Sanjeev Singh, who emphasised the importance of always having a well thought out solution in mind, one that not only protects the client’s interest but, where possible, also accommodates or dilutes disputed points in a manner favourable to the opposing side. This approach requires an intense and nuanced understanding of the law, coupled with a deep reading of the factual matrix, and it significantly enhances credibility before the Court.

I consciously studied these nuances and gradually adapted such skill sets, adding my own perspective and style before applying them in my own matters. Fairly early in my career, I also gained clarity about what it takes to succeed at higher forums, rigorous preparation, strategic thinking, courtroom discipline, and consistency. I realised that I possessed both the temperament and the drive required for this profession. With sustained dedication and hard work, made easier by the fact that I genuinely enjoy litigation, I was confident that I could build a meaningful practice and hold my own on larger platforms.

What was the single defining moment in your career that transformed your perspective on litigation and set you on a path of sustained growth and success?

It is difficult to point to a single defining moment in a professional journey that has spanned over seven years and has been anything but eventful. However, since ethics and discipline have always been values I hold deeply, one particular incident stands out and fundamentally shaped my perspective on litigation and professional growth.

While appearing as counsel for the Municipal Corporation of Delhi, I was once directly offered a bribe to merely delay the filing of an affidavit, so as to give undue leverage to one of the parties involved. Although I was not entirely unaware that such practices exist in isolated corners of the system, being confronted with it so directly was both unexpected and unsettling.

At that moment, the choice before me was stark and unmistakable. One path promised immediate monetary gain but came at the cost of credibility, self respect, and long term integrity. The other path demanded firmness and restraint but guaranteed inner strength, professional respect, and sustainable growth. The clarity of where each road would lead made the decision a straightforward one.

That incident crystallised what I wanted to be known for as a lawyer, someone approached for depth of legal understanding, sound judgment, and principled advocacy, rather than someone whose doors open with a bag of cash. It also reinforced my belief that while litigation certainly requires street smart thinking and strategic navigation, one must have absolute clarity on the larger ethical framework within which those strategies operate.

In this context, my engagement with the Bhagavad Gita and its various commentaries has had a profound influence on me. It offered perspective on Dharma, particularly in a profession where one is frequently confronted with morally complex choices, and helped me anchor my practice in righteousness, clarity, and long term vision rather than short term gain.

What marked the turning point that led to the establishment and growth of Dhruv Chawla Law Offices?

The establishment of Dhruv Chawla Law Offices was not the result of a single defining moment, but rather a gradual transition shaped by experience, responsibility, and growing confidence. From an early stage in my career, I had begun taking up matters independently, even while continuing to assist and learn from my seniors. Over time, the volume and nature of my independent work steadily increased, allowing me to develop both professional judgment and client facing responsibility alongside chamber practice.

This parallel journey of learning and independent advocacy continued organically, and by mid 2022, I felt prepared to take the decisive step of setting up my own practice full time. The decision was rooted not in haste, but in a clear assessment of readiness, both in terms of legal competence and the ability to manage matters end to end with accountability.

Through this journey, one belief has become central to my approach, particularly for young litigators. I strongly encourage budding advocates to believe in themselves and begin taking up matters independently as early as possible. There is no teacher more effective than direct exposure to responsibility, being in the courtroom, making real time decisions, and standing fully accountable to the client. At the same time, independence must be tempered with humility. Seeking guidance, taking second opinions, and remaining open to learning are essential to ensuring the best outcomes for clients. Confidence is vital in litigation, but it must never cross into rashness.

Litigation often demands resilience. Can you share a setback or challenging phase that transformed your approach to your practice?

If you were to speak to my seniors, I suspect they would have no shortage of stories about the setbacks and lessons along the way and you might have to stop them midway. On a lighter note, litigation has a way of humbling you regularly, and I have certainly had my fair share of such moments.

Jokes aside, I can say without hesitation that I have been fortunate to work under exceptional seniors throughout my journey, each phase contributing significantly to the way I practise today. I began at SKV Law Offices, where I was exposed to bulk litigation and learned the importance of case management, efficiency, and handling volume with consistency. I then had the opportunity to work under Mr. Tushar Singh, where meticulous drafting, precision, and attention to factual detail were rigorously instilled in me. Subsequently, at Sanjeev Singh Associates under Mr. Sanjeev Singh, I developed a far more refined and analytical approach to the law, with a strong emphasis on depth of legal understanding and intensive research as the backbone of effective advocacy.

Each transition came with its own challenges and setbacks, the process of refinement is rarely smooth. However, I credit my seniors for recognising potential early on and investing time and effort in grooming it, which played a crucial role in shaping me into a more disciplined and thoughtful litigator.

Like most independent professional journeys, challenges never truly disappear. Financial uncertainty, inconsistent workflow, and even the absence of a proper workspace were realities at different stages. What helped me navigate these phases was sustained self belief and the confidence to persevere through uncertainty. I firmly believe that an absence of challenges often signals stagnation rather than success. While I do not seek difficulties, I have learned to view them as opportunities for growth.

While representing hospitals and healthcare institutions, what sector specific legal and regulatory challenges do you encounter most frequently?

Representing hospitals and healthcare institutions presents a unique set of legal and regulatory challenges, largely because disputes in this sector often arise at the intersection of law, medicine, and human emotion. One of the most persistent challenges is the timely adjudication of disputes, particularly those relating to allegations of medical negligence. A significant number of such matters fall within the jurisdiction of consumer fora, and it is not uncommon for these cases to remain pending for years, sometimes even decades. The prolonged timelines place an immense burden on all stakeholders, doctors who are already engaged in demanding professions, and patients or their families who are navigating legal proceedings in the aftermath of trauma or loss.

Another recurring challenge lies in the nature of medical negligence allegations themselves. While some complaints are well founded and deserve strict legal scrutiny, a large number arise from grief and emotional devastation following the loss of a loved one. In such cases, doctors often become the immediate focal point of blame. These matters therefore require not only legal precision but also a nuanced understanding of medical protocols and human psychology.

From a regulatory perspective, the healthcare sector is subject to overlapping compliance frameworks, evolving standards of care, and heightened judicial scrutiny. Successfully navigating these matters requires a careful balance between protecting medical professionals from unfounded allegations and ensuring accountability where negligence is genuine. The challenge lies not merely in legal defence, but in preserving professional integrity, patient rights, and systemic trust.

Public Interest Litigations and pro bono work form a significant part of your journey. What draws you towards social causes and policy impacting litigation?

Public Interest Litigations and pro bono work lie at the very core of my practice and, in many ways, define my approach to advocacy. I strongly believe in advocacy for a cause, and this philosophy consistently reflects in the matters I choose to pursue. For me, the law is not merely a dispute resolution mechanism but a powerful instrument for systemic correction and social accountability.

In 2021, I came across an illegally installed advertisement hoarding in Delhi promoting an alcohol brand, despite such advertisements being expressly prohibited by law. Acting purely on principle, I filed a Public Interest Litigation titled Dhruv Chawla v. GNCTD & Ors. [W.P.(C) 5124/2021]. With clear legal research, a well defined cause of action, and focused reliefs, the illegal hoarding was removed. I vividly remember standing in front of the removed structure and realising the transformative potential of the legal profession.

That experience became the foundation for several subsequent PILs addressing larger systemic issues such as groundwater depletion in Punjab, air quality degradation in Delhi, and other matters impacting public health and environmental governance. These interventions reaffirmed my belief that even individual legal action, when pursued with conviction and preparation, can bring about tangible change.

Looking ahead, how do you see your role evolving as an advocate in shaping jurisprudence, public policy, and access to justice in India, and what advice would you offer to the younger generation?

Looking ahead, I believe that with the right intention and a stable mindset, an advocate can play a meaningful role in shaping jurisprudence and public policy. Practices such as meditation have helped me cultivate clarity, balance, and perspective, qualities essential for engaging with complex legal and policy issues. I strongly believe that effective law making requires a fine balance between technical precision and practical wisdom, and I strive to position myself at that midpoint.

As my journey evolves, and with a growing understanding of institutional functioning and governance, I would like to contribute more actively to policy formulation and nation building. With a natural inclination towards public affairs, I see my role gradually expanding beyond individual disputes to engaging with issues that have long term structural impact.

I also believe that India’s civilisational knowledge systems offer valuable insights even today. Many contemporary challenges such as environmental degradation, ecological imbalance, ethical governance, and social inequality find thoughtful guidance in our ancient texts. Concepts of Dharma, Raj Dharma, and Sarva Bhuta Hita emphasise governance rooted in responsibility, harmony with nature, and collective welfare. Thoughtfully integrating these principles into modern policy making can create sustainable models with global relevance.

To the younger generation, my advice is simple. Do not be afraid to take calculated risks. Keep learning relentlessly and respect knowledge from every source. Place yourself in your client’s position and strive to be the kind of lawyer you would want representing you. Integrity, empathy, and preparation will always outlast shortcuts. The profession is demanding, but for those who commit sincerely, it is deeply rewarding.

Get in touch with Dhruv Chawla –

Sushant Inderjeet Singh, Advocate at the Supreme Court of India and various other courts of the country whose work bridges constitutional law, human rights, and public policy. A first-generation learner with academic roots at National Law University Delhi and SOAS University of London, he brings a perspective shaped by lived experiences and a commitment to social justice. Known for his grounded approach and impact-oriented advocacy, he reflects on access to justice, representation and the evolving landscape of equality driven legal practice.

This interview has been published by Anshi Mudgal and The SuperLawyer Team

What were some of the defining moments or challenges in your journey from a small village to global platforms that shaped your path as a first-generation learner and lawyer? 

I was born in a small village called Madhogarh in Bulandshahr, Uttar Pradesh, into a Dalit family that had lived through generations of caste-based exclusion. My grandparents were denied even the most basic dignity.My grandmother never owned a pair of slippers because Dalits were not allowed to wear them. Caste dictated every aspect of life, including the work we were “supposed” to do.

For me, education became an act of resistance, the only path to reclaim both dignity and freedom. My parents moved to Delhi in the early 1990s so that their children could study. They worked tirelessly, as a bus conductor, at a gas station, and even as a security guard  to fund our education. My sister went on to become a doctor, and I pursued law, carrying forward their dreams and sacrifices.

When I joined National Law University Delhi, I entered a world very different from where I came, academically rigorous, socially stratified, and deeply competitive. Navigating that space while confronting the subtle and not-so-subtle realities of caste was one of the greatest challenges of my life.

From that small village to the Supreme Court of India, and to global platforms like SOAS, University of London, and the House of Lords, every milestone reminds me that representation matters. When I was elected as President of the Students’ Union, Universities in the UK, House of Lords, and the Indian Embassy in London invited me to speak, a moment that reaffirmed how far a first-generation learner can go when given a chance.

What first inspired you to pursue law as a career? Was there a particular experience or turning point that directed you toward this field? 

I never planned to become a lawyer. In school, I studied science and imagined a different future. It was actually a friend who first suggested law to me, almost casually. At that time, I didn’t fully understand what it meant. AsI grew up, I began to see injustice around me more clearly, people treated unfairly not because of wrongdoing, but because of caste or lack of awareness of their rights.

The real turning point came when I first read about Dr. B.R. Ambedkar. His story moved me beyond words. Here was a man who faced the same barriers yet transformed the very system that oppressed him using law not as a privilege but as a weapon of liberation. That realization changed everything for me.

I began to see law not merely as a profession, but as a calling, a way to challenge inequality and make justice a lived reality. Since then, every step I’ve taken has been guided by that purpose.

During your time at National Law University, Delhi (NLUD), what experiences laid the foundation and influenced your decision to pursue an LL.M. in Human Rights, Conflict & Justice at SOAS, University of London?

NLU Delhi was transformative. It exposed me to constitutional law, rigorous legal reasoning, and spaces to debate justice, equality, and rights. But it also revealed the deep inequalities within elite spaces. I co-founded the Ambedkar Periyar Phule Study Circle (APPSC) to create a platform for marginalized students and to make the campus more inclusive. These experiences shaped my commitment to social justice law.

At SOAS, University of London, my perspective broadened further. The LL.M. in Human Rights, Conflict & Justice allowed me to study law through a decolonial and comparative lens. I engaged with global frameworks of equality and transitional justice, learning to connect local struggles in India with international conversations on rights and justice. That exposure strengthened my conviction that the fight against caste and inequality must be both local and global.

Growing up, I had no understanding of foreign education or the pathways to study abroad, my only reference was Dr. B.R. Ambedkar, who had studied in London and the United States. His journey inspired me to believe that someone from my background could also aspire to global education. During my years at NLUD, I saw many seniors and batchmates pursuing advanced degrees overseas, which motivated me to explore similar opportunities. I began asking people about the application process and started preparing my own LL.M. applications. However, I did not have the financial means to pay application fees, so I applied only to universities that waived them. That constraint shaped my choices, but it also strengthened my resolve to pursue higher studies with whatever limited resources I had.

With over eight years of experience in service matters, human rights law, constitutional law, and social justice litigation, what drew you to these areas of practice? 

I was drawn to these areas because they deal directly with human dignity. Service and constitutional matters may seem technical, but behind every case is a human story of someone fighting for livelihood, fairness, or recognition.

Human rights and social justice work demand both patience and courage. The cases are often emotionally demanding and under-resourced, but they hold immense potential to transform lives and systems. Each matter becomes not just a legal fight but a moral responsibility  to uphold the Constitution’s promise of equality and justice.

Could you share what the NOS Scheme is and how other eligible students can access or benefit from it?

The National Overseas Scholarship is a Central-sector scheme of the Ministry of Social Justice & Empowerment (for SC / DNT / landless labourers / traditional artisans) and the Ministry of Tribal Affairs (for ST / PVTG candidates), designed to enable low-income, meritorious students from historically disadvantaged communities to pursue master’s or Ph.D. studies abroad. 

Under the scheme (2025–26 guidelines), annually up to 125 fresh awards (subject to fund availability) are reserved under the SC-category scheme: out of these, 115 for Scheduled Castes, 6 for Denotified / Nomadic / Semi-Nomadic Tribes, and 4 for landless agricultural labourers / traditional artisans. Thirty percent of scholarships are reserved for female candidates.

To be eligible, a candidate must obtain an unconditional offer of admission from a foreign university (typically among the top 500 global universities), meet the prescribed academic criteria (e.g., 55% marks or equivalent in qualifying degree), and their total family income should be below the prescribed threshold (for SC/DNT scheme, historically around ₹8 lakh per annum; for ST scheme, previously ₹6.00 lakh per annum). 

If selected, NOS covers, at least in principle, the full cost of tuition fees, an annual maintenance allowance (in USD), contingency allowance, visa/airfare expenses, medical insurance, and other incidental costs. 

What inspired you to advocate for marginalized students in the National Overseas Scholarship, and which student experiences from your work left the most impact on you?

When I decided to represent marginalized students in the National Overseas Scholarship litigation, the motivation came from my lived experience as a Dalit first generation learner rather than from any personal benefit under the scheme itself. I did not receive NOS, but I belong to a Scheduled Caste community and I truly understand how difficult it is for a Dalit student to dream of studying abroad. For most students from our communities, even imagining foreign education feels out of reach. Admission may come through merit, but without financial help these opportunities simply collapse.

I was fortunate to study abroad only because I received a partial scholarship from the Government of Delhi and additional support through crowdfunding. That support allowed me to pursue my LLM at SOAS University of London. During that time I was elected the President of the SOAS Student Union, received several speaking invitations, and gained exposure that changed the direction of my professional and personal life. None of this would have happened without financial assistance. That is why I deeply empathize with Dalit and Adivasi students who secure prestigious admissions but cannot join for want of financial support. For them, the National Overseas Scholarship is often the only life changing opportunity.

The National Overseas Scholarship scheme is a central government programme designed to support students belonging to Scheduled Castes, Denotified Tribes, Nomadic Tribes, landless labourers, traditional artisans, and Scheduled Tribes who wish to pursue masters and doctoral degrees abroad. Each year a specific number of scholarships are reserved for these communities. To qualify, a student must hold an unconditional offer of admission from a recognised foreign university and their family income must fall below the prescribed threshold. Once selected, the scholarship covers tuition fees, living expenses, contingency grants, airfare, visa and insurance costs. For many first generation learners, this is the only viable path to overseas higher education.

However, the litigation revealed that the scheme was not functioning as intended. Many eligible and deserving students were rejected because of minor technical errors in documents or because their online submissions did not upload correctly. Some students received offers from foreign universities but could not join because the scholarship award letters were delayed beyond university deadlines. Others were rejected because of rigid documentation formats that did not account for ground realities. There were also years where funds remained pending and the ministry withheld scholarships despite students meeting all requirements. These issues showed that access to education is not just about having schemes; real access requires efficiency, fairness, and sensitivity in implementation. Litigation became essential because without judicial intervention many of these students would have permanently lost their only chance at higher education abroad.

Through this work, I realised again that equality in education is not merely a constitutional promise but a lived struggle. The fight is not about individual success stories alone. It is about ensuring that children of workers, bus conductors, farmers, labourers, and single income families are not denied opportunities simply because they were born into poverty. True educational equality is achieved only when the system recognises their merit without drowning them in bureaucracy or indifference.

Interesting and impactful personal experiences: 

Some of the students whose cases we represented illustrate this reality with painful clarity.

Dhiraj is a meritorious student whose father works as a bus conductor. He is the first person in his family to aspire for a masters degree abroad. He secured an unconditional admission offer for a Masters in Materials Science and Engineering at Nanyang Technological University in Singapore, yet faced scholarship roadblocks that threatened to end his journey before it could begin.

Manish is a talented Scheduled Caste student who secured an unconditional offer for a Masters in Computer Science at the University of Glasgow. Despite fulfilling every academic and income criterion, he faced procedural hurdles under the scholarship scheme.

Laxmi Narayan Dhire is the first in his family to pursue higher education abroad. He secured an unconditional offer for a Masters in Computer Science at the University of Liverpool, but was held back because his application was trapped in administrative delays.

Vishal is the son of a labourer and an Anganwadi worker. He secured an unconditional offer for a Masters in Economics at the London School of Economics. His family background made him entirely dependent on NOS funding. Without it, an admission letter from LSE would become meaningless.

Sagar Morle comes from a family that has lived through generations of poverty. Their total annual family income is only thirty six thousand rupees. His father had to give up his own education due to poverty, but Sagar broke that cycle by earning a PhD offer from the University of Sussex. He faced rejection under NOS despite clearing every requirement.

Lagan comes from a modest family with a heavy debt burden of thirty five lakh rupees. Her elder brother is mentally disabled and dependent on her father, the only earning member. She earned an admission offer abroad but was denied the scholarship that could have transformed her entire family’s future.

Vedant Fitter belongs to a family that has struggled for generations to meet basic needs. His father had to sacrifice his dream of education due to poverty and has now retired. With no stable income in the house, Vedant became the hope for his family when he secured admission to the University of Sydney for a Masters in Computer Science. Yet, he too faced denial under NOS.

There are many more stories like these. They demonstrate that behind every litigation file is not just a case but a family placing its entire hope in one child. These cases show that achieving equality in education requires more than creating a scheme. It requires ensuring that the scheme actually reaches the very people for whom it was created.

For me, taking up these cases was not a professional decision. It was an ethical one rooted in my own experiences, my community, and my belief that justice must translate into real opportunities. The struggle for fair and accessible education is not about courtroom victories alone. It is about dignity, hope, and the belief that a student’s future should not be decided by poverty or bureaucratic delay.

As a practitioner before the Supreme Court and the Delhi High Court, what have been some of the most challenging or meaningful cases you’ve handled?

Some of the most meaningful cases I’ve handled have been those involving students’ rights, caste discrimination, and service matters affecting livelihoods. I am currently representing the family of Amrutha, a student from National Law University Delhi who allegedly died by suicide, a case that raises larger questions about institutional accountability, mental health, and caste bias in educational spaces.

Preparing for such cases means immersing myself in both the law and the lived experiences behind it. I spend as much time listening to clients and understanding their realities as I do drafting arguments. Litigation in constitutional and human rights law is as much about empathy as it is about expertise.

What advice would you give to young lawyers who aspire to integrate legal practice with advocacy for social transformation?

I would tell young lawyers: don’t let others define what “success” in law looks like. Law is not only about corporate offices or billable hours, it is also about standing for something bigger than yourself.

Focus on learning the craft of research, drafting, and courtroom discipline, but also build empathy and social awareness. Be fearless in speaking truth to power, but stay humble and rooted in the communities you serve.

Above all, remember that the Constitution is not just a document it’s a moral promise. Your work as a lawyer can help fulfill that promise. Ambedkar is to follow and be the change maker to the lives of millions.

How do you manage stress and maintain balance between your professional commitments and personal well-being? 

It’s a constant effort. I’ve learned that sustainability is as important as passion. Beginning my mornings with exercise and meditation, help me stay centered. I often spend time in community spaces like the Buddha Vihar, play outdoor sports, or simply walk in the park to clear my mind.

I remind myself that justice work is a marathon, not a sprint. Taking time for reflection and travel helps me regain perspective. Most importantly, spending evenings with my parents and sisters grounds me. Their support reminds me where I came from and why I continue this journey.

Get in touch with Sushant Inderjeet Singh –

Harsh Trivedi, Founder and Managing Partner at Trivedi & Parashar, views law not as a planned career but as a calling shaped by purpose, service and experiences. Growing up in an Army household, studying commerce at SRCC, witnessing the Nirbhaya proceedings, and working with the Government of India, each phase shaped his journey as lawyer through conviction, mentorship and resilience. This conversation traces his formative influences, the building of a full-service law firm and key lessons learned along the way, and the advice he believes every aspiring lawyer should carry forward.

This interview has been published by Anshi Mudgal and The SuperLawyer Team

What initially drew you to pursue law, coming from a commerce background, was there a personal moment that guided you? 

Coming from an Army background, the idea of service was never taught to me, it was lived  around me every single day. I grew up watching my family place duty above comfort, integrity above convenience, and courage above certainty. Very early in life, it became clear to me that money would always be a consequence, never the objective. What mattered was whether I was  contributing something meaningful to the society and country that shaped me. Ironically, my journey didn’t begin with clarity about what I wanted to do. In fact, it began with clarity about what I did not want to become, someone who drifted through life without purpose. After studying at Shri Ram College of Commerce, the conventional trajectory pointed towards business or finance. But I felt an unmistakable disconnect. I didn’t want a career that revolved purely around transactions. I wanted a life built around impact. 

Law entered my life almost incidentally. I chose it initially as a stepping stone for the Civil  Services Exam because I aspired to join the Indian Police Service. I thought wearing the IPS uniform would be the most direct way to serve my country. But destiny has an interesting way of revealing your path. In my first year of law school, I had the chance to observe the Nirbhaya  case proceedings. That experience shook me in a way I couldn’t articulate then. I saw a  courtroom become a place where the collective pain of a nation sought answers, where truth was not assumed but fought for, and where young lawyers stood shoulder to shoulder with  giants of the profession. Watching that humanity, courage, and logic converge under the  scrutiny of the law changed something fundamental in me. 

It struck me that the legal profession is the only one where hierarchy, lineage, and protocol are powerless in the face of preparation. If you are well-read, well-reasoned, and principled, your  age, background, and connections do not matter. A 23-year-old counsel can stand before the court and oppose a 90-year-old titan and both are heard with equal seriousness. That purity, that equality of voice, moved me. It made me realise that this profession honours conviction  above all else. 

But perhaps my earliest encounter with the law happened long before my first courtroom visit. It happened at home. I had grown up seeing ordinary people struggle with things that should not break a person, asserting their rights, navigating bureaucracy, facing arbitrary decisions, or simply trying to be treated with dignity. I learnt that helplessness often doesn’t come from  the absence of strength, but from the absence of knowledge. And I remember silently thinking, “If I ever get the tools to fix this, I will.” 

That thought, simple, stubborn, and deeply internal, is what eventually pulled me towards the law. Not ambition, Not an opportunity, Not a five-year plan. Just the quiet belief that if I could stand between a person and their most vulnerable moment, I should. And somewhere along that  journey, without fanfare or dramatic realisation, I understood: 

Law was not my career choice. It was my calling. A calling shaped by service, strengthened by exposure, and anchored in the conviction that clarity, fairness, and dignity must never be luxuries, they must be rights.

What early experiences with law firms and Senior Advocates shaped your professional foundation? 

My early years in the profession shaped my character more than my caseload. My first mentor was Ms Ruby Singh Ahuja, Senior Partner at Karanjawala & Co. Working with her taught me to prepare, to be fearless, and to maintain the discipline required to stand firmly on facts and law. She showed me what it means to lead with clarity and conviction, and she built in me the  confidence to argue with substance rather than volume. 

I later worked with Mr. Akhil Sibal, Senior Advocate. From him, I learnt patience, calm thinking, and the ability to explain the most complex matter in two simple sentences. If you cannot simplify an issue, you have not understood it. That lesson changed the way I read,  analyse, and argue. He also reminded me that humility is not weakness. It is a strength. 

Outside the mentorship of great seniors, the real foundation came from the unglamorous work. I was the junior who carried files, waited outside courtrooms, and stood in queues for certified copies. Those tasks taught me attention to detail, respect for the process, and the importance of  preparation. 

Two early lessons stayed with me. Precision is compassion, and a careless line in a draft can  harm a client quietly yet permanently. Humility builds mastery. The more I learnt, the more I realised how much more there was to learn. Before I learnt to speak like a lawyer, I learnt to think and behave like one. That grounding has stayed with me throughout my journey. 

How did your dual-specialisation Master’s degree from Leiden University contribute to your pursuit of excellence? 

I have always felt that a true university education should expand one’s mind, challenge assumptions, and encourage us to imagine ideas that can outlive us. But many of us grow up inside an Indian education system where learning is overshadowed by the fear of not getting  placed. Instead of questioning the world, students end up questioning their own worth. That quiet pressure betrays the very purpose of education. 

Leiden University freed me from that limitation. My Master’s programme was not just an  academic pursuit; it was a shift in consciousness. Leiden did not instruct me on what to think.  It invited me to reflect on how to think. I was surrounded by scholars, diplomats, policy thinkers  and students from more than forty countries. Every conversation felt like a window into another  worldview. We spoke about geopolitics and technology, human rights and cybersecurity, data  governance and public policy. Learning became expansive, alive, almost limitless. 

Two realisations changed me. I began to see the law not as something trapped within national  borders, but as a global language that connects societies far beyond their political identities.  And I understood that knowledge is not an ornament or entitlement. It is responsibility. You are  expected to think deeper, act wiser and engage with the world with greater clarity. 

My time at Leiden also taught me something even more subtle and profound. Beneath the  surface differences of statutes, procedures and legal traditions, the law is essentially a shared  human instinct across jurisdictions. The pursuit of justice, the instinct to protect rights and the  logic of fairness are remarkably universal. That insight reshaped the way I approach litigation, 

governance and policy. It made me look at legal problems not through the narrow lens of a single system, but through the broader lens of how humanity negotiates fairness. 

Leiden gave me the courage to step away from predictable paths and create a career that blends  litigation, technology, public policy and international thinking. It widened my world and  deepened my purpose. More than anything, it reminded me that education is meant to liberate,  not limit. It is meant to ignite ambition, not suppress it. It is meant to make you larger than your  fears, not smaller than your potential. 

Every lawyer has a phase that transforms them. What was yours? 

After Leiden, I returned to India with a renewed sense of purpose. I chose not to stay abroad, not to chase comfort or certainty, but to serve. I joined the core team of Ms Nirmala Sitharaman  as her Assistant Private Secretary, first in the Ministry of Defence and later in Finance and the  Ministry of Corporate Affairs. Those years exposed me to the highest levels of governance and  the weight of national responsibility. I served during moments when the country itself felt on  edge, including the days surrounding the Pulwama attack. It was a period that taught me how  decisions made in rooms with no cameras can affect the lives of millions outside. 

But it also clarified something within me. Even while working at the heart of government, I realised that the place where my voice had the most authenticity was the courtroom. Policy  shapes nations, but advocacy shapes people. And I wanted to be close to people. 

Leaving the government and returning to law felt like stepping into my own skin again. Yet, the  most transformative moment came when I walked away from the safety of employment and  decided to build my own law firm from the ground up. Starting from scratch demands a different kind of courage. There is no safety net. There is no fallback. You wake up knowing  that client trust, quality of work, growth, and survival depend entirely on your discipline and  integrity. In those early months, I argued my own matters, drafted through the night, managed  accounts, built operational systems, met clients, and made hard decisions in silence. There were  no shortcuts. Only persistence. Those years taught me a resilience that no courtroom ever could. 

That phase transformed me from a lawyer into a leader. I became responsible not only for my  own cases but for the careers, families and futures of the people who believed in my vision.  Building a firm is not about opening an office. It is about creating a space where ambition,  ethics and excellence coexist. It is about building something that stands even when you are not  in the room. 

That decision to return to India, to serve in government, and then to step away and build  something of my own has been the most defining chapter of my life. It taught me that purpose  is not found. It is forged.

What has been one of the most challenging cases of your career, and how did you  navigate it? 

Some of the most challenging matters in my career were not difficult because of their legal complexity, but because of their human consequences.

I once handled a high-stakes commercial dispute where a family’s entire financial future hinged on a single injunction order. Beneath the pleadings were decades of savings, sacrifices and  anxieties that never appear in the record. I prepared obsessively, anticipated every counter argument, built an airtight factual matrix and stayed emotionally grounded. When the court  granted relief, the clients did not talk about “winning”. They said they could finally “breathe  again”. That moment reminded me why our work matters. 

Two other examples have stayed with me with equal force. 

The first was a property matter involving an elderly couple who had invested their life  savings into a home that was wrongfully denied to them. What seemed like a technical dispute  was, for them, the difference between security and uncertainty in the final years of their lives.  Every hearing carried the weight of their trust and their timeline. When we finally secured  possession for them, the relief on their faces meant more than any citation. 

Another was a corporate recovery case involving a small manufacturer on the brink of  shutting down because of a massive unpaid commercial debt. For the company, the litigation  was not about numbers. It was about the jobs of the 80 workers who relied on them, the  continuity of a family business and the preservation of dignity. When we secured recovery  through a combination of strategy, negotiation and structured compliance, it saved not just a  company but an entire ecosystem of people behind it. 

These cases taught me a simple truth. 

The law is technical. 

But justice is deeply personal. 

It is our responsibility as lawyers to stand at that intersection, translate human pain into legal  arguments and ensure that relief on paper becomes relief in real life. 

What has been your constant source of guidance and motivation throughout your  journey? 

My strongest source of guidance has been Mr. Vivek Sibal, Senior Advocate. He has been a  steady influence in my life from my internship days till today. His clarity, balance and sense of  proportion have shaped the way I think, prepare and conduct myself as a lawyer. Whenever I  have been at a crossroads, his advice has always reminded me to stay grounded and focused on  the essentials. 

My biggest motivation, however, comes from my family. They have backed every risk, every  long night and every difficult phase without questioning the path I chose. My wife has been an  anchor through the most demanding years of building the firm. Her patience, emotional  strength and belief in my work gave me the space to grow. 

I also draw strength from my business partner, Mr. Shantanu Parashar. We started with nothing  except conviction. For almost six years now, we have built the firm brick by brick, sharing both  the responsibility and the weight of the journey. His trust and partnership inspire me to keep  raising the bar.

What truly keeps me going is the simple belief that if I can be useful every single day, whether  to a client, a colleague or my team, that is enough. Consistency, honesty and purpose are the  only things I try to show up with, no matter how chaotic the world outside may be. 

What advice would you give students/new graduates entering corporate and commercial law? 

The first thing I tell young lawyers is this: stop seeing yourself as a victim just because you are  a first-generation lawyer. Your identity card is enough to enter any courtroom in this country. Walk in, observe arguments, find a counsel whose work inspires you, and simply ask them for  an internship. Courage opens more doors than connections ever will. 

Your first three bosses will shape your professional DNA. Choose them carefully. They will  either make you fall in love with the law or push you away from advocacy entirely. Look for  mentors who teach, correct, and forgive. And be humble. You cannot learn if you pretend to  know. 

In the initial years, you do not have expertise to offer, but you do have two things: consistency  and integrity. Show up every day with sincerity. Do not lie, do not pretend to work, and do not  cut corners. A good senior values honesty more than perfection because he knows you will  make mistakes as you grow. 

Take pride in your gown. Carry yourself with respect. This profession demands dignity both  inside and outside the courtroom. 

Three principles will stay with you throughout your career: 

• Do not chase glamour. Chase mastery. People may remember good lawyers, but they respect the ones who are irreplaceable. 
• Build strong foundational skills. Drafting, research, reading statutes, breaking down contracts, and understanding commercial  logic are non-negotiable. 
• Be patient with your journey. Your first job is not your destiny. Your twenties are for absorbing, observing, failing, and  learning. The habits you build now will decide the lawyer you become later. 

The legal profession rewards depth, discipline and character far more than loud ambition. Show  up. Work hard. Stay humble. And the profession will open itself to you. 

How can law students navigate internships and stay updated on legal developments? 

Intern smart, not wide. Choose internships that teach you skills, not just give you an access  card. Work with people who will critique you. It is uncomfortable, but it builds you faster than  anything else. 

On staying updated: I recommend:

• LiveLaw & Bar & Bench (daily legal updates) 
• SCC Online Blog (analysis of judgments) 
• PRS Legislative Research (policy + Bills) 
• RBI & SEBI circulars (for corporate/commercial law) 
• Podcasts like The Seen and the Unseen and War on the Rocks (for broader thinking) And most importantly: Read one judgment a week. It will change your brain.

Get in touch with Harsh Trivedi –

Aamir Khan Wali represents a new generation of globally oriented legal practitioners, with a career spanning Indian Courts, Global Law Firms, and high-stake international arbitration cases that has shaped his philosophy of precision and disciplined advocacy. As the legal profession transforms under globalization, technology, shifting geopolitics and cross-border disputes, lawyers who pair legal expertise with culture, negotiation skills and strategic thinking are redefining how justice is practiced. This interview highlights his defining career moments, landmark experiences, and practical insights for aspiring lawyers seeking careers with global relevance and impact.

This interview has been published by Anshi Mudgal and The SuperLawyer Team

When did the idea of studying law first take shape for you?

To be perfectly honest, law was my accidental destiny. During school, I was busy chasing the spotlight, studying acting at the National School of Dramatics, convinced my future was on the stage. I saw law as the antithesis of creativity, all black robes and no flair. The transformation began in the quiet halls of a library, not a courtroom, during a Law and Literature class. Reading The Merchant of Venice was my pivotal scene; it wasn’t just about Shylock’s pound of flesh, but the raw, human drama of justice, mercy, and the terrifying power of a legal bond. This sparked a fascination with the ancient, dramatic roots of law from Hammurabi to the Roman jurists and I realized the most compelling scripts weren’t in theatres, but in statute books and legal codes. The law, I discovered, was the ultimate stage for human conflict and resolution.

What early experiences helped build your foundation at leading firms?

My time at firms like Fox Mandal and AZB was less about learning the law and more about learning the craft. Good research is the skeleton of any argument, but the senior advocates I worked with taught me how to give it muscle and soul. They showed me that a legal strategy is a living thing, it needs to breathe, adapt, and strike with precision. I learned that the most formidable weapon in a lawyer’s arsenal isn’t just precedent, but the ability to tell a compelling story that resonates with a judge’s humanity. They instilled in me a discipline I carry to this day: the obsessive, almost artistic, pursuit of a watertight case.

What was the turning point that led you to start your own chambers?

The turning point was a slow-burning disillusionment with the factory-like model of traditional law firms. I grew weary of the rigid hierarchies, the gatekeeping of knowledge, and the relentless focus on profit-per-partner that often overshadowed the client’s actual problem. I saw brilliant legal minds reduced to billing machines, and clients treated as files, not people with profound stakes in the outcome. It felt like we were selling a product, not providing a service. That frustration crystallized into a purpose: to build a practice that was a sanctuary from that soullessness.

The Chambers of Amir Khan Wali was born from a desire to give clients direct access to strategic, bespoke counsel, free from the bureaucratic bloat that so often dilutes excellence.

How would you describe your evolution as a lawyer?

My evolution has been a journey from mastering the microscope to navigating the map. Early on, you are trained to focus intensely on a single legal issue, to know one tree with immense depth. With experience, your vision expands. You start to see the entire forest: the interconnected ecosystems of multi-jurisdictional regulations, the geopolitical climates that affect cross-border enforcement, and the commercial realities that underpin every dispute. My practice today is less about isolated legal arguments and more about architecting holistic strategies.

It’s a scientific process of diagnosing the core ailment, a logical mapping of all possible jurisdictional pathways, and a reasonable assessment of the commercial endgame, whether in Mumbai, Singapore, or Doha.

What inspired you to start your own practice after working with international firms?

I was inspired by the stark realization that most law firms are designed to be hotels, excellent at providing standardized rooms for a night. I wanted to build a home.

The enriching experience at large firms such as Sultan Al Abdulla in Doha gave me the technical blueprint, but it also showed me the void it left. Clients don’t need a team of 20 associates where only two do the thinking; they need a singular, obsessive focus on their problem.

My Chamber is the antithesis of the legal factory. We are a small, agile unit built for deployment, not deliberation and offer precision, not process. We are the special forces of the legal world, while most firms operate as the standing army.

What challenges have you encountered in cross-border arbitration?

The greatest challenge is navigating the invisible cultural and emotional fault lines beneath the legal arguments. In the Swiss Timing arbitration, representing a government official, the case wasn’t just about corruption statutes; it was about managing the profound reputational terror of a nation.

In the Panna-Mukta-Tapti oil fields arbitration, co-counseling with Allen & Overy, the challenge was harmonizing a UK-style aggressive advocacy with the more nuanced, relationship-preserving approach expected by Indian public sector clients.

You are not just a lawyer; you are a diplomat, a cultural translator, and a psychologist, all while ensuring a billion-dollar award doesn’t unravel on a procedural technicality.

Is there one case that stands out and shaped your approach?

Well, there are many. But working with the legendary Sr. Adv. Percival Billimoria on a fundamental rights petition for a Parsi child was a masterclass in legal humanity. The case was, on paper, about the entitlement to a sports club.

In reality, it was about the soul of a community and the innocence of a child caught in the crossfire of his parents’ divorce. Mr. Billimoria’s strategy was breathtakingly detailed; he didn’t just attack the legal issue, he built a fortress around the child’s dignity. We left no sociological, historical, or emotional stone unturned. That case taught me that true legal strategy is a deep, empathetic immersion into the client’s world. You don’t just win the case; you win back their life.

What key trends are emerging in cross-border disputes?

We are witnessing a tectonic shift. The energy transition is sparking a new generation of “green disputes” contracts for fossil fuel projects are being torn up, leading to massive arbitration claims under Investment Treaties.

My early work with the National Green Tribunal and launching the first international environmental law journal under Justice Swatanter Kumar (Retd.) positioned me at the forefront of this.

Simultaneously, the digital infrastructure boom, powered by AI and data, is creating a wild west of regulatory conflicts. My forthcoming book, Beyond Headlines, argues for specialized media tribunals to handle the coming deluge of complex, tech-driven legal battles. The future of law is not just in oil and gas, but in algorithms and carbon credits.

What practical advice would you share with young advocates?

My most practical, and perhaps unpopular, advice is to stay ruthlessly sober, both in mind and habit. This profession is a marathon of the intellect, and substances such as alcohol and drugs often act as a sedative for ambition in our profession. Be an early riser, because the quiet hours of the morning are when the best strategies are born.

Pick up a sport that you like, it really helps attain clarity of thought and if that’s not your jam – pray, meditate, and do breath work when you can. Have the confidence to be bold in courtrooms and the humility to ask for help, it’s a sign of strength, not weakness.

And finally, find your tribe. This is why I built The Armoury, a global community for solo practitioners, industry experts and mentors. Join us, it’s free of cost and contribute to platforms like our newsletter, The Dispatch, and learn that while the law is a solitary practice, you don’t have to practice it alone. Visibility and success come from the connections you cultivate.

Get in touch with Aamir Khan Wali –

This interview has been published by Anshi Mudgal and The SuperLawyer Team

How did your time at Law College and LSE shape your thinking about corporate and policy today?  

My journey into law wasn’t linear, it was shaped by both personal circumstance and a deep sense of purpose. In fact, I initially leaned toward medicine. I had performed well academically in the sciences and was genuinely drawn to the discipline’s precision and human impact. But as the only daughter in my family, my father, himself a distinguished General Counsel, Corporate Lawyer in the real estate sector for over three decades, encouraged me to stay in Mumbai. His guidance wasn’t just parental; it was deeply inspirational. I had grown up watching him navigate complex legal landscapes with integrity, clarity, and strategic foresight. His work wasn’t confined to contracts, it shaped institutions, resolved conflicts, and built trust. That exposure planted a seed in me: the idea that law could be a tool not just for regulation, but for transformation. 

Choosing law was both a tribute to his legacy and a leap into my own. At the University of Mumbai’s Law Faculty, I found myself immersed in the rigors of legal reasoning, learning to dissect arguments, interpret statutes, and appreciate the layered nature of justice. It was a formative period that taught me discipline, precision, and the power of language. But it was my time at the London School of Economics that truly expanded my intellectual horizon.

LSE introduced me to the global dimensions of law, how it intersects with economics, governance, ethics, and public systems. I was exposed to comparative legal frameworks, policy innovation, and the role of law in shaping equitable societies. It was there that I began to see myself not just as a lawyer, but as a strategic thinker and public policy advocate. 

Looking back, both institutions shaped me in complementary ways. Mumbai gave me my legal spine, grounded, rigorous, and rooted in Indian jurisprudence. LSE gave me my wings, global perspective, policy fluency, and the ability to think across disciplines.  Together, they shaped the way I approach corporate and policy matters today. Whether I’m advising on infrastructure strategy, drafting legislative frameworks, or mentoring future leaders, I draw from this dual foundation: one that blends legal precision with policy imagination. 

Ultimately, my decision to pursue law was not just about career, it was about impact. I saw law as a language of leadership, a framework for fairness, and a bridge between institutions and citizens. And that belief continues to guide me, whether I’m in a boardroom, a policy roundtable, or a classroom. 

Law, to me, is not static, it’s a living discipline that evolves with society, and I remain committed to using it as a force for ethical governance, institutional resilience, and systemic change. 

What were some of the experiences early on that really shaped your approach and laid the foundation for your career? 

Every career has its crucible moments, those early experiences that test your resolve, stretch your thinking, and quietly shape the professional you become. For me, one such moment came early in my journey: a complex, high-stakes debt restructuring that spanned multiple jurisdictions, each with its own legal framework, regulatory sensitivities, and cultural nuances. The stakes were high, the timelines tight, and the interests often conflicting. It wasn’t just a legal puzzle; it was a multidimensional challenge that demanded strategic clarity and a deep understanding of both business imperatives and human dynamics. 

I remember being struck by how traditional legal approaches alone weren’t enough. I had to think beyond statutes and precedents, to integrate financial logic, commercial pragmatism, and diplomatic negotiation. It was in that crucible that I learned one of the most enduring lessons of my career: that law, at its best, is not rigid, it’s responsive. It must adapt to context, anticipate risk, and serve as a bridge between competing interests. That experience taught me to approach every matter not just as a lawyer, but as a strategist, a listener, and a problem-solver. 

It also shaped my belief in the power of perspective as a Corporate Lawyer. Legal issues rarely exist in isolation, they are embedded in ecosystems of policy, finance, technology, and people. To be effective, one must learn to see the full picture. That early challenge instilled in me a habit of looking at problems from every angle, legal, commercial, operational, and human. It taught me to ask better questions, to listen more deeply, and to lead with both precision and empathy. 

Since then, I’ve carried that mindset into every role, whether advising on infrastructure strategy, negotiating cross-border transactions, or shaping legislative frameworks.  Flexibility, creativity, and emotional intelligence have become central to my practice. I’ve come to believe that legal excellence is not just about technical mastery, it’s about  contextual intelligence. And the ability to navigate ambiguity with integrity is what truly defines a strategic legal advisor. 

Those early years didn’t just teach me the ropes, they laid the foundation for how I lead, how I mentor, and how I engage with institutions. They taught me that the law is not merely a set of rules, it’s a living discipline that must evolve with society, respond to complexity, and reflect conscience. And that belief continues to guide me, whether I’m in a boardroom, a policy roundtable, or a classroom. 

How has working with prominent companies in high stake matters influenced your perspective on corporate governance and have you noticed the landscape changing since you started?

Over the past 15 years, my journey through India’s leading law firms and corporate houses, Khaitan & Co., Wadia Ghandy & Co., L&T Limited, S&P Global, GLAS (Global Loan Agency Services, London), Voltas Limited (a Tata Enterprise), as well as my research tenure at the Institute of Economic Affairs, London, has profoundly shaped my understanding of corporate governance. Early in my career, governance was often viewed through a narrow lens of regulatory compliance. Today, it has evolved into a strategic pillar that influences everything from boardroom decisions to stakeholder trust. 

Working across sectors on complex matters, ranging from cross-border transactions and commercial arbitration to ESG integration and digital transformation, I’ve seen firsthand how governance frameworks can either enable or inhibit long-term value creation. The shift toward ethical leadership, data accountability, and stakeholder inclusivity is not just aspirational, it’s becoming operational. 

India’s corporate landscape is undergoing a quiet revolution. Governance is no longer reactive; it’s proactive, predictive, and deeply intertwined with reputation management, investor confidence, and institutional resilience. The rise of ESG mandates, board diversity norms, and real-time compliance technologies reflects a maturing ecosystem that values transparency and purpose. 

As legal professionals, we are now expected to be strategic advisors, not just gatekeepers.  This calls for a multidisciplinary approach that blends law, policy, technology, and ethics.  I believe the future of governance lies in its ability to anticipate risk, foster trust, and align business with societal outcomes. 

How do you manage various roles such as corporate lawyer, advisor, mentor, and thought leader all while still finding time for learning and personal growth? 

Balancing the roles of corporate counsel, strategic advisor, mentor, and thought leader has been a dynamic journey, one that demands not just discipline, but a deep sense of purpose.  For me, learning is not a checkbox; it’s a lifelong commitment. No matter how seasoned one becomes, every boardroom conversation, policy debate, or mentoring session offers fresh insights. I’ve always believed that growth stems from curiosity, and that curiosity must be nurtured with consistency. 

In my professional life, I make it a point to stay ahead of legal and industry developments not just through reading and research, but by engaging with diverse communities. 

Attending seminars, contributing to policy forums, and mentoring young professionals are not just responsibilities, they’re reciprocal learning spaces. Teaching sharpens my own thinking. Listening to emerging voices helps me anticipate the future. 

Time management is critical, but so is intentionality. I carve out time for reflection, writing, and strategic learning, even amidst high-stakes negotiations or policy drafting. Whether it’s exploring new governance models, understanding the implications of digital law, or contributing to thought leadership on child data protection, I treat each engagement as an opportunity to evolve. 

Personal growth, to me, is about staying intellectually agile and emotionally grounded. It’s about being open to change, resilient in the face of complexity, and generous with one’s knowledge. In a world that’s constantly shifting, legally, technologically, and socially, leaders must be learners first. That’s the philosophy I live by. 

How do those two worlds of corporate and government advisory compare in terms of complexity and the kind of strategic decision-making involved?

Having worked extensively across both corporate legal leadership and government advisory, I’ve come to appreciate the distinct complexities and strategic demands that define each domain. While they may seem worlds apart in pace and priorities, both require a deep understanding of systems, a commitment to clarity, and the ability to translate legal insight into actionable strategy. 

In the corporate world, decisions are fast, data-driven, and often shaped by market imperatives. Legal counsel here is expected to be agile, able to respond swiftly to regulatory shifts, negotiate high-stakes transactions, and align legal frameworks with business goals. The complexity lies in managing financial risk, navigating competition, and ensuring compliance without stifling innovation. It’s a space where precision, speed, and commercial acumen are paramount. You’re constantly balancing legal integrity with business ambition, often under intense timelines and scrutiny. 

Government advisory, by contrast, operates on a broader canvas. The stakes are societal, the timelines layered, and the outcomes far-reaching. Here, the focus shifts from profitability to public welfare, from quarterly metrics to generational impact. Strategic decision-making involves navigating legislative intent, constitutional boundaries, and the diverse interests of citizens, institutions, and political actors. The complexity is not just legal, it’s systemic. It demands patience, diplomacy, and a deep respect for democratic processes. You’re not just interpreting law, you’re shaping it, often in ways that will influence millions.

What I’ve learned is that each domain cultivates a different kind of leadership. Corporate roles teach agility, the ability to pivot, negotiate, and deliver under pressure. Government advisory teaches vision, the capacity to think long-term, build consensus, and design frameworks that serve society. Both require strategic empathy, clarity of communication,  and an unwavering commitment to integrity. 

Bridging these worlds has profoundly shaped my approach to law and policy. It has taught me that legal strategy must be both responsive and responsible. Those institutions, whether corporate or public, thrive when legal counsel is not just reactive, but proactive, principled, and purpose-driven. The true power of law lies in its ability to connect ambition with accountability, and innovation with inclusion. 

Ultimately, I see my role not just as a legal advisor, but as a translator between systems, someone who can bring the precision of corporate law into the realm of public policy, and infuse the vision of governance into the strategic heart of business. It’s this dual lens that allows me to contribute meaningfully to both institutional resilience and societal progress.

Looking at how the legal industry is evolving, especially in sectors like infrastructure, finance, and real estate, how do you see the roles of lawyers changing? 

The role of legal counsel is undergoing a seismic shift, especially in sectors like infrastructure, finance, and real estate, where the velocity of change is matched only by the complexity of regulation. Traditionally, legal teams were positioned as reactive problem solvers, stepping in post-facto to manage disputes or ensure compliance. Today, however, legal advisors are embedded within the strategic nucleus of organizations, guiding decisions from inception to execution. They are no longer just interpreters of law, they are architects of resilience, enablers of growth, and stewards of ethical governance. 

My journey across premier law firms such as Khaitan & Co. and Wadia Ghandy & Co., and corporate leadership roles at Larsen & Toubro and Voltas (a Tata Enterprise), has given me a front-row seat to this transformation. In these sectors, legal counsel must navigate not only statutory frameworks but also evolving business models, stakeholder expectations, and geopolitical undercurrents. Whether it’s structuring complex infrastructure deals, negotiating cross-border finance arrangements, or advising on land acquisition and regulatory risk, the legal function is now deeply intertwined with business strategy. 

Looking ahead, I believe the most successful legal professionals will be those who embrace multidisciplinary. Legal expertise alone is no longer sufficient. Counsel must be fluent in finance, technology, ESG frameworks, and digital governance. They must understand the language of data, the implications of AI, and the nuances of global trade and investment.  Strategic thinking, commercial awareness, and negotiation skills will remain foundational, but they must be augmented by digital literacy, policy foresight, and the ability to collaborate across disciplines.

Equally critical is adaptability. The pace of regulatory reform, technological disruption, and stakeholder activism is accelerating. Lawyers must be agile learners, capable of anticipating risk, interpreting ambiguity, and advising with clarity. Continuous learning, through policy engagement, academic collaboration, and cross-sectoral dialogue, will be the hallmark of future-ready legal professionals. 

In essence, the legal advisor of tomorrow is not just a guardian of compliance, but a catalyst for innovation, institutional trust, and systemic reform. We are entering an era where legal strategy is inseparable from business resilience and public accountability. And that, I believe, is both a challenge and an extraordinary opportunity. 

What would you say to young professionals, especially women aspiring for in-house or advisory roles, about navigating challenges and building a fulfilling career in corporate law?  

To every young professional stepping into the world of corporate law, especially women aspiring for in-house or advisory roles, I would say this: believe in your abilities, even when the path feels uncertain. Self-doubt is natural, but it must never be allowed to define your choices. Corporate law is demanding, yes, but it is also deeply rewarding for those who approach it with consistency, curiosity, and courage. 

In my own journey, I’ve learned that challenges are not roadblocks, they are catalysts for growth. Whether it’s navigating a complex transaction, managing competing interests, or balancing professional and personal responsibilities, each experience builds resilience.  Don’t shy away from difficult assignments, they stretch your thinking, sharpen your instincts, and prepare you for leadership.

Seek mentors who challenge and uplift you. Surround yourself with peers who inspire excellence. Network wisely, not just for visibility, but for learning. Stay updated with industry trends, regulatory shifts, and emerging technologies. The legal landscape is evolving rapidly, and adaptability is your greatest asset. 

For women, the journey often involves balancing multiple roles, with grace, grit, and quiet determination. It’s not always easy, but it is absolutely possible. Focus, self-belief, and clarity of purpose will guide you through. And remember: success is not a fixed destination; it’s a personal definition. Don’t measure your worth by someone else’s yardstick. Define success on your own terms, whether it’s impact, influence, balance, or legacy. 

Above all, enjoy the journey. Every negotiation, every setback, every breakthrough adds to your story. Corporate law is not just about contracts and compliance, it’s about leadership, strategy, and shaping institutions. And you, as a young lawyer, have the power to shape that narrative with integrity, intelligence, and heart. 

Get in touch with Dr. Richa Pathak –