What the captured NIRF submission evidence establishes
For the 2027-28 guide edition, the available official material does not establish a current numerical NIRF position for Institute of Technology and Science (I.T.S), Ghaziabad. The institute's current NIRF 2026 submission PDF is the file now served at this address. The historical evidence discussed next comes from a separate earlier capture of the NIRF 2025 file. The previously captured 2025 file is headed “Submitted Institute Data for NIRF’2025’” and identifies the Management entry as “INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY AND SCIENCE [IR-M-C-46115]”. That proves which submission belongs to this institution; it is not a rank card and does not state an all-India position.
That distinction matters because a submitted data file can be detailed without being a ranking result. The I.T.S report includes management-category intake, student-strength, placement and higher-studies tables. Those sections describe data supplied for NIRF’s process. They should not be converted into a rank, a rank band or a claim that the institute is “top” a specified number of institutions. This review did not verify a numerical 2025 NIRF Management rank for I.T.S from a published ranked result, so it does not claim one or describe a rank trend.
A similarly named Ghaziabad institution can create a misleading comparison. In the official NIRF India Rankings 2024 Management table, Institute of Management Technology (IMT), Ghaziabad appears at rank 35, with score 56.03. That result belongs to IMT. It is not an I.T.S result, and a city match or a shared word such as “Institute” is not enough to transfer a rank. Always match the institution name and, where available, its NIRF institute code.
What NIRF’s Management score measures
The NIRF 2025 Management methodology weights Teaching, Learning and Resources at 30%, Research and Professional Practice at 30%, Graduation Outcomes at 20%, Outreach and Inclusivity at 10%, and Perception at 10%. The final order is therefore a weighted institutional assessment across several dimensions, not a ranking of one MBA specialisation or a placement-only league table.
The methodology makes the practical reading clearer. Teaching, Learning and Resources includes student strength, faculty-student ratio, faculty qualifications and experience, and financial resources. Research and Professional Practice covers publications and their quality, projects, professional practice, and executive or management development programmes. Graduation Outcomes combines placement and higher studies with university examination results and median salary. Outreach and Inclusivity considers students from other states, women’s participation, economically or socially challenged students, and facilities for persons with disabilities. Perception comes from employers and academic peers.
Because placement is one part of Graduation Outcomes, it cannot stand in for the full NIRF score. Nor does a submitted placement table alone tell an applicant how the other weighted parameters performed. A high or low number in one table should be read within its cohort, academic year and denominator, then checked against the rank result for the same category and edition. NIRF’s Management category also compares institutions at institutional level; it does not assign a separate national NIRF position to each I.T.S programme or specialisation.
How to use the I.T.S submission responsibly
The 2025 file reports sanctioned intake of 240 for the two-year postgraduate programme group in each of academic years 2023-24 and 2022-23. In its actual-student-strength table, it reports 493 students across all years of the relevant two-year postgraduate programme group: 297 male and 196 female students. The same table classifies 341 as from within Uttar Pradesh and 152 from outside the state. These are institution-submitted management figures, not a ranking position and not a current-year MBA intake confirmation.
The document also presents three placement and higher-studies rows for graduating cohorts from 2021-22 through 2023-24, paired with intake years. Those are useful for checking the period and programme grouping behind reported outcomes, but they are historical cohorts. Applicants should compare them with the dedicated placements page and current programme disclosures rather than treating them as a forecast for the 2027-28 intake. The NIRF report’s scope and year labels need to travel with each number; removing them makes the figures look more current and more course-specific than the source supports.
What applicants should check before comparing colleges
For a useful comparison, first choose one publisher and one category. Do not combine NIRF Management with an MCA survey, a B-school magazine table or an institutional award. Next match the edition year and the exact institution. Confirm whether the publisher gives a numerical rank, a rank band, a rating, a regional position or only a participation listing. Those labels are not interchangeable. A participant list establishes participation; it does not mean each listed institution received a ranked position.
Then inspect what is measured. NIRF’s Management weights make clear that teaching resources, research, outcomes, inclusion and perception all contribute. A student focused on employment may care particularly about the outcomes metrics, but should separately review placement cohort size, eligible and placed counts, median salary, programme identity and reporting year. A student comparing academic depth may look at faculty, research and curriculum evidence. Neither preference changes what the published rank means; it helps decide whether that ranking’s scope matches the student’s own priorities.
For I.T.S Ghaziabad, the previously captured official 2025 NIRF Management submission identifies the institute by name and code but supplies no rank. The current NIRF 2026 submission is served at the linked address; neither submission establishes a numeric I.T.S position or improving trend. Use this as a source-status note, not as a negative quality judgement. Before relying on a later number, open the NIRF result for the relevant edition and Management category, verify the exact I.T.S name or code, and keep any rank, band and score attached to that same row. Do not carry the historical 2025 submission year forward as a 2027-28 ranking.