Our Double-Blind Referral Process
Peer review is nothing but subjecting an author's paper to the scrutiny of a fellow expert in the said field. This aids the Journal in two ways: One, facilitates authors to identify errors, if any in the manuscript, and their correction before publication and two, aids the Journal in publishing papers of standard quality that indeed contribute something additional to the existing literature.

Overview of Review Process
Once a manuscript is received from an author, it will be checked by the Editor-in-Chief. of the Journal to ensure that its subject matter falls in line with that of the Journal and that it fits with the overall philosophy of the Journal. On the other hand, if he finds that the paper has no new science/references are not up-to-date/inferences are not apparently supported by experimental data, etc., the CE may reject the paper.

Once satisfied of these facts and observes that the manuscript is from a credible source, CE will arrange to mail the manuscript to two referees who are known as accomplished researchers in the fields to which the paper belongs for their scrutiny. Authorship details of the paper such as name/s of author/s, institutional affiliation, etc., are deleted before the papers are mailed to the referees.

On examining the paper, the reviewers may recommend it for publication/ rejection/suggest modifications/corrections. CE will forward all such comments to the authors for their compliance. On receipt of the revised/modified manuscript, it will again be sent to the referees for approval.

If the authors have a contradictory opinion on the comments of the referee, they are free to communicate the same to CE, who in turn, will transmit them for the referees' examination. In any case, the Journal goes by the final verdict of the referees.

On both the reviewers recommending the manuscript, the CE will forward it for layout and subject it to the normal in-house editorial process. Finally, the edited and print-ready copy of the paper will be sent to the author/s for their approval. On receipt of their acceptance, the paper will be released for publication in the Journal.

On the other hand, if the referees recommend for its rejection, the paper will be returned with a regret note to the author/s. In the event of any conflict in the recommendations of the reviewers, the CE, depending on the nature of the underlying reasons and their credibility, either will decide acceptance/acceptance on modification on his own or may prefer to call for the opinion of a third expert to accept or reject its publication.

In this whole process, the anonymity of the referees is religiously guarded.

The Journal ensures that the review process is timely and fair. To ensure speedy review, CE strives to maintain a panel of referees who are known to have specialized knowledge in the discipline/more general knowledge base, preferably young scholars who are generally perceived to be willing to undertake such reviews. He would also ensure that no conflict of interest creeps into the review process.

Reviewer's Role
Once the manuscript is received from the Journal, the referee would confirm to himself that the content of the paper falls within his competency to review and then examine the originality of the research question examined, its context in terms of current literature, appropriateness of experimental design, the correctness of inferences drawn and readability of the presentation. If there are any missing links, he may suggest modifications to the manuscript/improvement in the experimentation, etc.

Speedy Completion of Review Process
CE attempts to complete the review process speedily but many a time it solely rests on the cooperation of the reviewer. So, authors need to note that it is a collaborative venture and hence any delay may be pardoned in the right spirit.

Similarly, authors are requested to cooperate in making the amendments to the manuscript as suggested by the referees and return the manuscript speedily and also bear with the process delay, if any, once in a while.