Editorial Workflow

The reviewer (if nay) may be selected from the potential reviewers provided by the authors while submitting the article but its not mandatory to send only to them. The reviewers will review the papers and submit their own review report along with their recommendations of one of the following actions

Publish Unaltered
Publish after Minor Changes
Review again after Major Changes
Reject: Manuscript is flawed or not sufficiently novel
Reject : Manuscript is a repeat publication/ Plagiarized

When all reviewers have submitted their reports, the chief reviewer can make one of the following editorial recommendations to the Area Editor

Publish Unaltered
Review Again after Minor Changes
Review Again after Major Changes
Reject

If the recommendation is publish unaltered the Chief Editor process the article for publishing, the article will be sent to Technical Editor.

If the recommendation is to submit after minor changes, the article will be send to the corresponding author of the article for submitting after making the recommended corrections. Corresponding author is the responsible person to resubmit the article after making recommended corrections within stipulated time.

If the recommendation is to submit after major change, the Chief Editor determines whether to accept the paper or not, if he rejects the author will be informed about the decision, if he accepts the above-mentioned procedure will be adopted.

If the decision is rejected, authors will be informed about the decision over mail, they are requested not to resubmit the same paper again. Authors are requested not to resubmit the article which was rejected in the review process.

The total process from submission to intimation may take anywhere in the range of 10 days to 20 days,