Placement-cell report: 2024-25
NIT Kurukshetra’s Training and Placement Cell publishes programme-level outcomes for the 2024-25 academic session and the 2021-25 graduating batch. Its undergraduate table reports 676 placed students out of 787 eligible students, an 85.90% placement rate on that eligible-student denominator. The table lists an overall median package of ₹10 lakh and average package of ₹13.21 lakh. These are reported campus outcomes for that batch, not a promise of an individual offer or a current-year salary forecast. The table records 744 placement offers alongside 676 students placed. Offers and people are different counts: an individual may receive more than one offer, so the offer total is not the number of distinct students who found work. The 85.90% figure uses the placed-student count and eligible-student total shown in the report, not the offer count. The eligible count matters: the rate should not be recalculated against total enrolment or compared with an institution that uses a different denominator. Placement statistics, 2024-25
The same table shows substantial variation by programme. It reports median packages from ₹7.19 lakh for Civil Engineering to ₹12 lakh for Computer Engineering, Information Technology and Electronics & Communication Engineering. Programme medians are more useful than a single campus headline when a student is comparing a specific course, but the table does not establish that every student in a programme received the median amount. It also does not provide the full distribution of offers, job roles, locations or the number of students who opted out of placement. Read the report’s programme row and denominator together, and contact the placement office if you need a more detailed breakdown. Placement statistics, 2024-25
The report also gives each programme’s eligible and placed counts, which lets readers retain the denominator when comparing medians. For example, Civil Engineering lists 68 placed among 83 eligible, while Information Technology lists 124 among 129 eligible. Those percentages describe the named batch only; they do not show a student’s probability of receiving an offer in a later year.
A second measure: NIRF 2025 cohort data
The institute’s engineering submission to NIRF 2025 reports another cohort: four-year undergraduate students graduating in the minimum stipulated time during 2023-24. Of 1,100 graduates in that group, 590 were reported placed, and the median salary among placed graduates was ₹9 lakh. The submission also records 266 students entering higher studies. This is not the same population or reporting period as the placement cell’s 2021-25 table. NIRF’s group is defined by programme duration and completion timing, while the placement-cell document reports its own session and eligible-student measure. NIRF 2025 submitted engineering data
The two sources therefore should not be combined into a year-on-year trend or treated as contradictory versions of one statistic. They answer different questions. The placement-cell table helps compare programme outcomes within a named graduating batch; the NIRF submission gives a standardized cohort count for a specific set of graduates and a separate higher-studies count. Neither source alone describes the outcome for every current student or predicts the next graduating class. Placement statistics, 2024-25 · NIRF 2025 submitted engineering data
How to compare the figures
Before using a placement statistic in a college comparison, check four things in the source: the graduating batch or academic session, the included programmes, the denominator, and whether the salary measure is a median or an average. A median describes the midpoint of reported salaries and is less affected by a small number of unusually high offers than an average. The eligible-student placement percentage answers a different question from the number placed divided by all graduates. Higher-studies counts also describe a separate outcome and should not be silently removed from or added to a placement denominator.
For a programme-level decision, compare the exact programme row where the institute reports one, then look at the sample size and any students excluded from the denominator. Ask whether the published figure includes all eligible students, only registered candidates, or another defined group. Ask whether the reported salary is annual compensation and whether it includes variable pay or non-salary benefits; the cited summary tables do not resolve every compensation component. Do not infer a typical job role, hiring company, work location or guaranteed package from a median alone.
What the reports do not establish
The latest available placement-cell document reviewed here is for 2024-25, and NIRF’s cited cohort is 2023-24. Neither is a 2026-27 or 2027-28 result. The institute’s admissions and academic material may refer to a future intake, but that does not make historical placement data current. Applicants should use these figures as dated context and check the placement cell’s latest official report for later cohorts. The reports also cannot show how outcomes vary by individual academic performance, internships, specialization choices or personal constraints unless the institute publishes that breakdown.
A practical comparison should pair outcome data with the course curriculum, the fees for the applicant’s own batch, and the student’s intended role or further-study plan. The placement reports provide useful evidence, but they are retrospective and cohort-specific. Treat a published median as one input to a decision, not as a personal salary estimate.