Home India Education Parliament Question: Rigged NIRF rankings through patent fil...
Date: 2026-03-25 Category: RAJYASABHA_QNA State: Union Government Country: India

Parliament Question: Rigged NIRF rankings through patent filing

Issued by Education · Not Applicable

Research with AI Agent Chat with Document Generate Summary Translate Helpful Share Add to Project Create Task
Official Source Record View Original Source →
See Full Document Text
GOVERNMENT OF INDIA MINISTRY OF EDUCATION DEPARTMENT OF HIGHER EDUCATION RAJYA SABHA UNSTARRED QUESTION NO. 3703 ANSWERED ON 25.03.2026 Rigged NIRF rankings through patent filing 3703 Smt. Priyanka Chaturvedi: Will the Minister of Education be pleased to state: (a) whether the Ministry has examined concerns that National Institutional Ranking Framework (NIRF) patent metrics may incentivise volume of filings over quality, in light of low grant ratios for some institutions compared to higher grant rates in IITs; (b) whether current reimbursement norms for patent filings create perverse incentives in the absence of grant or commercialisation requirements; (c) whether large disparities in filings across institutions have been reviewed against national and international grant benchmarks; (d) the extent of commercialisation of patents counted under NIRF; and (e) whether reforms are proposed to align rankings with granted patents, outcomes and commercial impact, if so, the timeline thereof? ANSWER MINISTER OF STATE IN THE MINISTRY OF EDUCATION (DR. SUKANTA MAJUMDAR) (a) to (e): To promote healthy competition among Higher Education Institutions (HEIs), National Institutional Ranking Framework (NIRF) was launched in 2015 by the Government of India for the annual ranking (called India Rankings) of these HEIs. The methodology of India Rankings is based on five broad parameters, i.e. “Teaching, Learning and Resources” (weightage of 30%), “Research and Professional Practices” (weightage of 30%), “Graduation Outcomes” (weightage of 20%), “Outreach and Inclusivity” (weightage of 10%), and “Peer Perception” (weightage of 10%). Each of these five parameters have 2 to 5 sub-parameters. A total number of 19 sub-parameters are used for ranking of HEIs in different categories and subject domains. “IPR and Patents” is one of the sub-parameters of Research and Professional Practices (RP). However, the patents filed by institutions are not considered and not given any weightage in the India Rankings. For rankings, NIRF considers only patents published and granted.India Rankings 2025 were announced in nine categories and eight subject domains including the “Innovation” category. The ranking for Innovation Category is based on a set of key parameters, including Financial Support for Innovation (25%), Research and Innovation Output (30%), Innovation Achievements (15%), Pre-Incubation and Incubation (10%), Adoption Level of Innovation and Entrepreneurship (I&E) Policy in Higher Education Institutions (10%), and Perception (10%). In addition to IPR and Patents, “Patent Commercialization & Technology Transfer (PCTT)” is also one of the sub-parameters for the Research and Innovation Output (RIO) parameter. Therefore, NIRF Rankings are aligned with granted patents, outcomes and their commercial impact. ***

Continue your research