In Conversation with Senior Advocate S Ramasubramaniam

In the second interview with lawyers of the Madras High Court, Bar & Bench speaks to S Ramasubramanium, the founder of S. Ramasubramaniam and Associates. The Senior Advocate speaks about his experiences at the Bar, the need for a re-look at labour laws and his thoughts on litigation in India. .Bar & Bench: So what drew you towards studying law?.S. Ramasubramaniam: To be honest, law was not my first choice. In fact, my father was a lawyer but he died when I was quite young. My mother never wanted me to become a lawyer, she told me to get a job as soon as I graduated. Before joining Madras Law College, I was doing a clerical job but I always felt that I could do better. .Anyway, I joined Madras Law College for a reason I myself am not sure about. And once I joined, I got interested in academics. I even got a gold medal in Constitutional and International Law..B&B: And after that you started practicing in the Madras High Court?.SR: No, after graduating I went to my native place Madurai and started practicing there in the mofussil courts. My senior was a real taskmaster and very difficult to work with. He always wanted me to have all the facts at my fingertips, to anticipate what he wanted. He would often badger me, “Have you read this? Have you read that case? Why not?” Even now my juniors tell me that I pester them about the facts. I believe that when you are representing a client, you should know whatever he knows.B&B: And when did you decide to move to Madras?.SR: Again for a reason that I don’t know. I decided to shift to Madras in 1959. I had no godfather. I was helped by Shri C.R. Pattabhi Raman later Minister for Law, Government of India, helped me by permitting me to use his Chambers. I made my way up and worked with Mr. Dolia, a leading Labour Advocate, for 7 years. Then I started my own office and was appointed as Junior Central Government Standing Counsel to work with Shri Govind Swaminathan, as Senior Central Government Standing Counsel which lasted about 4 to 5 years. It was a great experience for me to be associated with such a wonderful human being like Mr. Govind Swaminathan. Professionally also it was a great time since I was dealing with various Central Government Departments independently with full support from Shri Govind Swaminathan. Then in 1972 I joined in a Senior position in an old Law Firm in Madras. I was there for 16 years from 1972 to 1988, the last 5 or 6 years as a Partner therein. That position gave me an all India Exposure and I was privileged to come into contact with great legal Counsel like Shri V.K.T. Chari in Chennai and Mr. Fali Nariman, Mr. K. Parasaran, Mr. K.K. Venugopal and Mr. Anil B.Divan in Delhi very closely. .B&B: That is when you started S. Ramasubramanium and Associates?.SR: Yes. I was already 56 years at that time, and was looking forward to becoming a Senior Counsel. I became a senior counsel in 1989. Two of my colleagues here, Mr. Krishna Srinivasan and Mr. Sanjay Mohan, who were with me at the earlier firm, persuaded me to form this partnership. After I became a Senior Counsel, I have retired from the Partnership and I am only an “Adviser” now. It has been nearly 25 years, and we are now one of the top litigating firms in Madras. .B&B: At that time, was it easy to start your own firm?.SR: Well, we already had quite a wide exposure and had a large number of clients. See there are some things that you cannot talk about: why you leave a firm and why do you start another firm – that is not for me to discuss. I will say that it was not a blind decision but a calculated one. Of course it was not very easy but I got a good response from the clients..B&B: What are the things you have learnt since then?.SR: You have to be true to the client and you have to be true to your conscience. There should never be a deviation from this..B&B: But what if what your client wants goes against your conscience?.SR: Never in my 56 years have I ever done something like that nor have I ever been asked to do something like this. That is quite rare I must admit. Or rather they may have asked me and then been sent away. At the initial stage itself, we tell them what is correct and I think it is still possible to have a highly ethical and successful career. At least you can sleep well in the night!.B&B: Do you think that such lawyers can survive?.SR: Definitely. Provided there is a backup in the judiciary. After all lawyers are only intermediaries. If the judiciary is strong, they will never let an honest lawyer down..B&B: Were you worried about making enough money when you started out?.SR: Yes, yes. That was a worrying factor. But compared to the time when I started, (nowadays) a lot of money is coming in. There is more corporate work. The quantum of the money involved has also increased. The correct way to proceed in this profession is to join someone and learn. You cannot be a successful lawyer from day one itself. More than a law degree is required to become a successful lawyer. You should know how to handle clients, handle judges and handle other advocates..B&B: How do you handle difficult clients?.SR: Well that depends on the degree of difficulty (smiles). If a client does not have a strong case, I tell them that. End of the matter..B&B: Have you lost clients because of that?.SR: Of course. But I have no regrets. See, you have to have the confidence of the client from the start to the end. You should be true to him and he should have faith in you. It is a mutual relationship. If he sees that you are trying to help him…. clients are not fools, they know when you are doing good work and when you are not..Never antagonize the other side, [you should] always keep the bridges open. Because today they may be fighting but tomorrow they may be willing to reconcile; you should not be a bar to this. A case that is settled is better than a case that is won; it gives you greater satisfaction all around. This is true for any field of law..B&B: You built up quite a strong labour practice at the firm. Do you think we need to take a re-look at labour laws?. SR: Totally. These laws have become completely out of date. You must remember that these laws were made during the socialist days – they are not fit for today’s economy or society..See labour protection is alright but there must be employer protection as well. Without an employer you cannot have employment. Therefore, you cannot put the rights of the employee to such an extent that you destroy the employer. How can you ask a man to keep a shop open when he keeps incurring losses? Today, no one looks at the whole picture. That is where the defect lies..B&B: You are saying the law is too pro-labour?. SR: There is too much protection of those in employment. If you protect an employee who is not doing his work properly, who is not behaving properly – first of all the employer will suffer, secondly the industry itself will suffer. There must be some balance..B&B: Do you think industry is bypassing labour laws by, say, employing contract labour?.SR: Yes but there is no other way..B&B: But isn’t that unfair?.SR: No, it is not unfair. All employment was originally under contract. Then people started exploiting these contracts and hence labour laws were formulated. To that extent, the exploitation was avoided. But then that situation changed after some time. In a competitive situation, the employer has realized that a good employee is an extremely valuable resource. Nobody will voluntarily remove a good employee. But today, if an employer wants to send out 20 people in order to protect 80 people, then he is prevented from doing so..B&B: But isn’t contract labour a way of avoiding these laws?.SR: Contract labour gives you flexibility. That is all that the employer needs. If I suddenly get some additional work, I should be able to employ more people and when there is no work, I should be able to let them go. That flexibility is all that is wanted. It is wrong to think that contract labour is exploitative or anything like that. I have been a Member of the Executive Committees of the Employers Federation of Southern India and Employers Federation of India as a Legal Member for over 25 years. I know that almost all the Honourable Employers in India never abuse their relationship with Labour..B&B: Do you think the attitude of the Courts have also changed in dealing with labour matters?.SR: True. Initially it was completely pro-labour. We had quite a tough time in those days. I even had the sympathies of my colleagues at the Bar! In fact I represented private employers as well as Central government companies. They did suffer. There was a pre-disposition that the employer is wrong..B&B: In 2009, there was quite a violent incident between lawyers and the police at the Madras High Court. How do you think such incidents can be avoided?.SR: That was an extremely sad situation. See I belong to the older generation. So I am not able to understand the fact that lawyers can even think of committing such violent acts, that too within the High Court. I am not able to understand this at all..My advice is to keep out of all these things. You know what they are doing is not right, but then at the same time you are not able to say anything since there is no democracy in such associations. How decisions are made in an advocates association is not known. I have always been against boycotts..I only think about the poor, ordinary advocate who is making his living day to day. The client has his own set of problems. We have no business stopping the work of the Court. It gives a very wrong picture of the Madras High Court to the outsiders. I have travelled a fair bit to various High Courts in India, Supreme Court and other All India Tribunals and Madras High Court and the Madras Bar used to have a very good reputation. I used to be proud of the fact that I was from the Madras High Court Bar. Nowadays, I don’t know. In any case, I don’t travel much nowadays..B&B: What do you enjoy the most about litigation?.SR: I enjoy litigation because I cannot think of sitting in an office and writing agreements – that is not my area of interest..Litigation is about understanding the problem of clients, understanding the problems of the other side, communicating this to the judge and then arriving at a decision that is according to the law and as per justice. That gives you more satisfaction than receiving any fees.You know, most people still have some faith in god or some superior force. There was a judge who used to say that after writing a criminal judgment, he would put it before an idol of a god. Now maybe that might be too much but I do believe that judges are doing god’s work. When you see two people who are fighting, what gives you the right to interfere? To judge between man and man is god’s work..But as long as judges realize that they are doing god’s work, there will be no difficulty. Of course, a lot of people don’t agree with this but that is the way I feel..B&B: Any advice for young lawyers? .SR:Who am I to give advice? I can only repeat what [Senior Advocate] Fali Nariman once said: one, have faith in yourself, and two, work hard and have humility. Work hard. I think that is good advice. You must have faith in yourself and you must do the best you can. Never take it easy. Humility is the realization that however much you will know, there is lot more to be known..This interview was conducted in Chennai on February 8, 2013. Bar & Bench would like to thank Advocate A. Reddy for his invaluable assistance in organizing the interview.