The NIRF 2026 rankings are awaited by students, parents and higher education institutions, but the Ministry of Education has not yet announced an official release date. Based on the release pattern of recent years, the rankings are expected in September 2026, although reports suggesting a third-week release remain unconfirmed.

Once announced, students will be able to check the category-wise rankings through the official National Institutional Ranking Framework website.

The NIRF rankings are used to compare higher education institutions across parameters such as teaching, research, graduation outcomes, inclusivity and institutional perception. Until the 2026 list is released, the NIRF 2025 rankings remain the latest official edition.

How to check NIRF 2026 rankings

After the rankings are published, students can check their preferred colleges and universities by following these steps:

1. Visit the official NIRF website.
2. Go to the Rankings section.
3. Select 2026 as the ranking year.
4. Choose the relevant category, such as Overall, Engineering, Medical, University, College or Management.
5. Open the ranking table or download the category-wise PDF.
6. Check the institute’s rank, score, ID and other performance details.

The rankings are expected to provide students with a category-wise comparison of participating institutions.

17 categories covered

The NIRF framework currently covers 17 categories, including Overall, Universities, Colleges, Research Institutions, Engineering, Management, Pharmacy, Medical, Dental, Law, Architecture and Planning, Agriculture and Allied Sectors, Innovation, Open Universities, Skill Universities, State Public Universities and Sustainable Development Goals.

The framework is designed to provide a common basis for assessing institutions while allowing comparisons within individual disciplines.

What determines an institute’s NIRF rank?

NIRF evaluates institutions using five broad parameters:

• Teaching, Learning and Resources (TLR): Faculty, students, infrastructure and learning resources.
• Research and Professional Practice (RP): Research publications, patents, funding and professional outcomes.
• Graduation Outcomes (GO): Examination results, placements and progression to higher studies.
• Outreach and Inclusivity (OI): Regional diversity, representation of women and disadvantaged groups, and support for students with disabilities.
• Perception (PR): Reputation among academics, employers and other stakeholders.

The weight assigned to these parameters varies across different ranking categories and institutional types.

NIRF 2025: IIT Madras led the Overall ranking

In the NIRF 2025 Overall ranking, IIT Madras secured the top position, followed by the Indian Institute of Science (IISc) and IIT Bombay. AIIMS Delhi, Jawaharlal Nehru University and Banaras Hindu University were also among the top 10.

IIT Madras also retained the No. 1 position in Engineering, extending its run at the top of the category to 10 consecutive years. It recorded a NIRF score of 87.31 in the 2025 ranking.

Whether IIT Madras and other leading institutions retain their positions will become clear once the NIRF 2026 rankings are officially released.

Chinese high school faces probe over one bathroom break per term rule

A high school in southern China is facing an official investigation after a classroom management policy limiting students to one emergency bathroom break per term triggered widespread criticism online.

The policy at Ruyuan County High School in Guangdong province came to light after a teacher shared a photograph of a PowerPoint presentation from an internal staff meeting. The presentation reportedly outlined classroom discipline rules and specified that students could leave class to use the bathroom only once during an academic term, except in what the school considered genuine emergencies.

The restrictions became progressively stricter for students who requested additional breaks.

According to the presentation, a student seeking a second bathroom break would require their parents to visit the school and discuss the matter with administrators. A third request could result in formal disciplinary action, although the presentation did not specify what punishment would follow.

Teachers also held accountable

The policy did not apply only to students. The presentation reportedly linked classroom discipline to teachers’ professional assessments.

Teachers could see their annual evaluations, promotion prospects and eligibility for performance awards affected if classroom discipline was considered inadequate. The guidelines described managing student behaviour as part of a teacher’s professional responsibilities.

The unusual approach quickly drew criticism on Chinese social media, with users questioning whether students should need to justify basic biological needs in such a rigid manner.

Some commenters described the policy as excessive and dehumanising, while others shared experiences of similarly strict toilet rules at their own schools.

School denies reports as education bureau investigates

When contacted by local media, a school staff member initially described the issue as a misunderstanding and later reportedly dismissed it as a rumour.

The local education bureau, however, confirmed that it had received multiple complaints and had begun an investigation into the school’s practices.

The controversy has since raised broader questions about the limits of classroom discipline and the treatment of students’ basic needs in highly controlled school environments.

While schools need rules to prevent unnecessary disruption during lessons, the incident has highlighted the difficulty of drawing a line between maintaining classroom discipline and restricting students’ access to essential facilities.

The education bureau’s investigation is expected to determine whether the policy was formally implemented, how it was enforced and whether it complied with local education regulations.