Peer-review-policy

The manuscript with publication potential will be sent to TWO subject experts for peer review. Based on its quality, novelty, and relevance for publication peer reviewer will evaluate the suitability of the article for publication. A reviewer is given a period of minimum 4 weeks to go through a manuscript and send the suggestions to the editor. A reminder from the editor will be generated if the editor fails to review on time, with additional 4 weeks’ time for review to be completed. If a reviewer is unable to meet the period agreed upon or he declines to review the manuscript, the manuscript will be sent to another reviewer.

The editors has established a system for rapid review of especially important manuscripts. This may include review only by editors or asking reviewers to complete their evaluations within a shorter period of time than is allowed routinely. Authors who seek rapid review should explain why their manuscripts merit such review.

Final decision

Reviewers are instructors to authors and editors. Suggestions with respect to acceptance, revision or rejection of manuscripts may be provided by the editors to reviewers. Editors will acknowledge the recommendations made by the reviewers but final decision will be taken by editor. Suggestions in the manuscript would be returned to authors for reconsideration. Authors will be granted a two weeks’ time period to make corrections as suggested by the reviewers. Authors will be asked to send a detailed covering letter addressing the issues pointed out by the reviewers with a point by point answer describing the corrections done/ reasons for not doing so. If manuscript is found satisfying by authors and editors, it will be accepted for publication in the coming issue. ditor holds the right to make amendments in the accepted article according to format of journal. The joural has a panel of experts on board with variety of knowledge and different viewpoints .Here BLIND PEER REVIEW is followed by a PEER REVIEW.