Instructions

• Title
• Author's affiliation (Author Name, Department, College, State, Country, Mobile Number and E-Mail should be provided)
• The Abstract should not be more than 400 words
• About 3 to 6 keywords should be provided.
• Heading and subheading should be numbered.

e.g.

1. Introduction
2. Material and Methods
3. Results
4. Discussion
5. Conclusion
6. Acknowledgment
7. References

Sudhakaran, Singh C. Judicial activism for combating the problem of child labour in India: A critical analysis. International Journal of Law. 2016; 2(3):17-26.

Role of Editors: The role of the editors is to evaluate the suitability of submitted manuscripts for the journal, including: (a) the quality of the manuscript, (b) whether it meets the Aims and Scope of the journal, and (c) the originality of the work. The editors will not disclose information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers or potential reviewers, or other members of the editorial board. Editors will ensure the prompt handling of the review process. Editors will evaluate the merit of manuscripts for intellectual content without regard to race, gender, country of origin, ethnicity, religion, or sexual orientation.

 

Role of Reviewers: Peer review is essential to the journal in assisting in making editorial decisions and assisting authors in manuscript improvement. Reviewers should point out relevant publications not cited in the manuscript and point out any similarities with previously published works. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts with conflicts of interest, competitive, financial, or collaborative. If a potential reviewer feels unqualified to review the manuscript, that reviewer should notify the editors immediately and decline the review. Manuscripts received for review will be treated as confidential documents and not shown or discussed with other without authorization from the editors. Authors should expect to receive reviewer reports in a prompt manner, normally within three weeks. Reviewer misconduct (breach of confidentiality, delay of peer review, plagiarism, or conflicts of interest) will not be tolerated.

 

Role of Authors: Authors of original research (not previously published or under consideration for publication elsewhere) should be an accurate presentation of the work carried out, a discussion of the significance of the work in context with previous works, and should contain sufficient experimental detail to allow others to replicate the work. Appropriate citation of previously published works must always be included. Authors should disclose any financial or other conflicts of interest that may be construed as influencing the data or interpretation. All sources of financial support should be disclosed. Authorship should be limited to those persons who have made a significant contribution to the work in terms of conception, design, experimental implementation, and data analysis and interpretation. All persons making significant contributions should be included as co-authors. If an author discovers a significant error in the published work, the author is obligated to inform the journal editor in order to either correct or retract the paper.

 

Role of the Publisher: In cases of proven scientific misconduct, plagiarism, or fraudulent publication, the publisher, in collaboration with the editorial board, will take appropriate action to clarify the situation, publish an erratum, or retract the work in question.

Criteria for Reviewing: Reviewers could judge any manuscript on the basis of following criteria:

• Format of the Article: Any major divergence from the standard manuscript format should be indicated.
• Technical Presentation: The research article should be technically presented instead of being presented as a story. Mere repetition of past work should not be accepted. You can look for conceptual advancement over previously published work. Any major omission of the previously published findings on the similar problem must be checked.
• Interpretation of Result: The discussion should hover around the result and should not include irrelevant and unachievable statement.
• Statistical Presentation: Proper statistics should be applied over the data wherever found necessary.
• Plagiarism of Data: Data showing any type of suspicion, duplication and manipulation must be brought to the notice of the author(s).
• Summary: Pin point the strength and weakness of the article considering potential importance of the work in the context of present and future.
• Conclusion: At the end reviewer(s) can recommend necessary corrections needed to accept the paper, if they are actually required, else recommend it for publication. If found unsuitable the paper should be declared as unacceptable for publication.
• Before acceptance, all manuscript must pass through a double blinded peer review process. Reviewers are not allowed at anytime of the review process to contact or view identification details of authors.

 

 

Copyright is transferred through a copyright transfer agreement signed by the authors before publication and the contents of the published papers are made available to readers without any restrictions.

There is a zero-tolerance policy towards plagiarism in our journal. Manuscripts are screened for plagiarism before, during, and after publication, and if found they will be rejected at any stage of processing.