03 — Medical
NIRF 2025 ranking. NIRF data only — no external benchmark appears in this note.
What NIRF reports
Section titled “What NIRF reports”| Level | Academic year | Institutes | Graduated | Placed | Higher study | Placed % | Higher study % | Institute median salary (p25 / p50 / p75) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| UG | 2022-23 | 45 | 6,953 | 4,203 | 2,469 | 60.45% | 35.51% | ₹540,852 / ₹950,000 / ₹1,250,000 |
| PG | 2023-24 | 50 | 8,764 | 7,069 | 1,393 | 80.66% | 15.89% | ₹912,000 / ₹1,560,000 / ₹1,900,000 |
Reading
Section titled “Reading”The only discipline whose UG track reports on a different academic year — 2022-23, because the 5-year MBBS had no 2023-24 cohort in the 2025 ranking. Any cross-discipline table that pins a single year drops it silently. Its UG placement rate of 60.45% sits below engineering’s, but 35.51% go to higher study: an MBBS graduate heading for a PG seat is not an unplaced graduate. At PG it reports the highest institute-median salary at any level in any discipline, ₹1,560,000.
Across ranking editions
Section titled “Across ranking editions”Showing the UG track.
Each row is a different NIRF ranking edition, read at that edition’s best-covered outcome year — the academic year most of its institutes reported. Anchoring on the latest year instead compares a thin slice against a full one: ranking 2019 had 192 engineering institutes reporting 2015-16 and 25 reporting 2017-18.
The rows are not a time series. Successive editions re-report overlapping academic years, and the ranked set itself changes size — watch the institute count.
| Ranking | Outcome year | Institutes | Graduated | Placed % | Institute median |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2019 | 2014-15 | 27 | 2,615 | 40.99% | ₹420,000 |
| 2020 | 2015-16 | 34 | 3,831 | 41.16% | ₹552,000 |
| 2021 | 2016-17 | 45 | 5,836 | 46.38% | ₹600,000 |
| 2022 | 2017-18 | 44 | 6,151 | 48.25% | ₹700,000 |
| 2023 | 2018-19 | 44 | 6,424 | 45.55% | ₹780,000 |
| 2024 | 2021-22 | 43 | 6,645 | 54.03% | ₹930,000 |
| 2025 | 2022-23 | 45 | 6,953 | 60.45% | ₹950,000 |
By rank band
Section titled “By rank band”The board gives this discipline one placement rate. Across 61 colleges — each read at its last report, banded by the rank it held that year — it looks like this. Only the bands NIRF’s ranking reached are shown.
| Rank band | Colleges | Graduates | Placed | Placed % | p25 | p50 | p75 | Median salary | Female enrolled |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1–10 | 10 | 1,221 | 828 | 67.8% | 49.0 | 81.2 | 100.0 | ₹6.3L | 51.8% |
| 11–25 | 14 | 2,139 | 1,444 | 67.5% | 42.1 | 65.3 | 90.7 | ₹11.3L | 55.0% |
| 26–50 | 37 | 5,997 | 3,236 | 54.0% | 35.3 | 66.5 | 79.2 | ₹7.5L | 52.0% |
| All | 61 | 9,357 | 5,508 | 58.9% |
What the bands show.
- Salary falls 0.8× from the top band to the bottom — ₹6.3L at ranks 1–10 against ₹7.5L at 26–50.
- Placement rate also falls with rank, 67.8% to 54.0%, at every step.
- The 26–50 band is the most consistent, p25 to p75 spanning 43.9 points, against 51.0 in the widest. A band tells you more about a college where the spread is narrow.
- Women are better represented further down the ranking — 51.8% of enrolment in the top band against 52.0% in the bottom. This is enrolment: NIRF publishes no placement or salary by sex, so nothing here says whether women were placed or paid equally, and the counts are taken at ranking time rather than for the graduating cohort.
Placement is the institute’s own unaudited submission and NIRF publishes no definition of “placed”, so a flat rate across bands is also what generous reporting further down would look like.
The wider set
Section titled “The wider set”The table above is the currently ranked set. NIRF has ranked more colleges in this discipline than it ranks today, and each of them last reported something. Counting every one at its own last report:
| Colleges | Graduates | Placed % | Higher study % | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Currently ranked | 47 | 7,211 | 61.23% | 34.82% |
| Ever ranked | 61 | 9,357 | 58.87% | 35.66% |
The wider set places 2.36 points lower. Colleges that left the ranking placed worse than those that stayed — which is what graduate outcomes feeding the NIRF score would predict. Quoting the current set overstates the discipline.
Mixed vintage: each college is read at its own last report, so this blends years. It is also biased low, because a college’s final report is often the year before it fell out. See COVERAGE.md.
What this note cannot tell you
Section titled “What this note cannot tell you”- Nothing about unranked institutions. NIRF ranks the institutes that apply to it; this is the ranked sector describing itself.
- Placement is the institute’s own submission, unaudited, and its definition of “placed” is not published.
- The salary figure is a median of institute medians, so it weights a small college the same as a large one. It is not the median salary of a graduate in this discipline and must not be quoted as one.
- Intake and outcomes are on different academic years, so no cohort funnel is computed here. See METHOD.md.