Publication Ethics and Policies

Editors' Responsibilities 
Distribution choices The editor is answerable for choosing which of the papers submitted to the diary will be distributed. The editor will assess compositions regardless of the authors' race, sex, sexual direction, strict conviction, ethnic root, citizenship, or political way of thinking. The choice will be founded on the paper's significance, creativity and lucidity, and the examination's legitimacy and its pertinence to the diary's degree. Current legitimate prerequisites with respect to defamation, copyright encroachment, and unoriginality ought to likewise be thought of. 
Secrecy The editor and any editorial staff must not unveil any data about a submitted original copy to anybody other than the comparing author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial guides, and the distributer, as suitable. 
Revelation and irreconcilable circumstances Unpublished materials unveiled in a submitted paper won't be utilized by the editor or the individuals from the editorial board for their own exploration purposes without the author's unequivocal composed assent. 

Reviewers' Responsibilities 
Commitment to editorial choices The friend evaluating process helps the editor and the editorial board in settling on editorial choices and may likewise serve the author in improving the paper. 
Quickness Any chose arbitrator who feels unfit to survey the examination detailed in an original copy or realizes that its brief audit will be incomprehensible ought to tell the editor and pull back from the audit procedure. 
Classification Any compositions got for audit must be treated as private records. They should not be unveiled to or talked about with others aside from as authorized by the editor. 
Principles of objectivity-Reviews ought to be led impartially. Individual analysis of the author is unseemly. Officials should communicate their perspectives unmistakably with supporting contentions. 
Affirmation of sources-Reviewers ought to recognize cases in which applicable distributed work alluded to in the paper has not been refered to in the reference area. They should call attention to whether perceptions or contentions got from different distributions are joined by the separate source. Reviewers will tell the editor of any significant similitude or cover between the original copy viable and some other distributed paper of which they have individual information. 
Revelation and irreconcilable situation Privileged data or thoughts got through friend survey must be maintained secret and not utilized for individual bit of leeway. Reviewers ought not consider original copies in which they have irreconcilable circumstances coming about because of serious, cooperative, or different connections or associations with any of the authors, organizations, or establishments related with the papers.
Specialists should lead their exploration from examine proposition to distribution in accordance with best practices and sets of accepted rules of applicable expert bodies as well as national and universal administrative bodies. In uncommon cases it is conceivable that ethical issues or unfortunate behavior could be experienced in your diary when research is submitted for distribution. 

Ethical responsibilities of Authors
This diary is focused on maintaining the honesty of the logical record. As an individual from the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) the diary will follow the COPE rules on the most proficient method to manage potential demonstrations of offense.
Authors should abstain from distorting research results which could harm the trust in the diary, the demonstrable skill of logical authorship, and eventually the whole logical undertaking. Keeping up uprightness of the exploration and its introduction can be accomplished by adhering to the standards of good logical practice, which include:
The original copy has not been submitted to more than one diary for synchronous thought.
The original copy has not been distributed beforehand (incompletely or in full), except if the new work concerns an extension of past work (it would be ideal if you give straightforwardness on the re-utilization of material to stay away from the trace of content reusing ('self-plagiarism')).
A solitary report isn't separated into a few sections to build the amount of entries and submitted to different diaries or to one diary after some time (for example 'salami-distributing').
No information have been manufactured or controlled (counting pictures) to help your decisions
No information, content, or hypotheses by others are introduced as though they were the author's own ('literary theft'). Legitimate affirmations to different works must be given (this incorporates material that is firmly duplicated (close to verbatim), summed up as well as summarized), quotes are utilized for verbatim replicating of material, and consents are made sure about for material that is copyrighted.
Significant note: the diary may utilize programming to screen for copyright infringement.
Agree to submit has been gotten expressly from all co-authors, just as from the dependable authorities - implicitly or unequivocally - at the foundation/association where the work has been done, before the work is submitted.
Authors whose names show up on the accommodation have contributed adequately to the logical work and thusly share aggregate duty and responsibility for the outcomes.
Authors are firmly encouraged to guarantee the right author gathering, relating author, and request of authors at accommodation. Changes of authorship or in the request for authors are not acknowledged after acknowledgment of an original copy.
Including and additionally erasing authors at modification stage might be reasonably justified. A letter must go with the changed composition to clarify the job of the additional as well as erased author(s). Further documentation might be required to help your solicitation.
Solicitations for expansion or expulsion of authors because of authorship debates after acknowledgment are respected after proper notice by the foundation or autonomous body and additionally when there is understanding between all authors.
Upon demand authors ought to be set up to send significant documentation or information so as to confirm the legitimacy of the outcomes. This could be as crude information, tests, records, and so on. Delicate data as classified or restrictive information is avoided.
On the off chance that there is a doubt of wrongdoing, the diary will complete an examination following the COPE rules. In the event that, after examination, the charge appears to raise substantial concerns, the blamed author will be reached and allowed a chance to address the issue. In the event that unfortunate behavior has been set up past sensible uncertainty, this may bring about the Editor-in-Chief's usage of the accompanying measures, including, yet not constrained to: On the off chance that the article is still getting looked at, it might be dismissed and come back to the author.
On the off chance that the article has just been distributed web based, contingent upon the nature and seriousness of the infraction, either a slip will be set with the article or in extreme cases withdrawal of the article will happen. The explanation must be given in the distributed failure or withdrawal note.

THERE IS NO PUBLICATION FEE FOR EACH ACCEPTED PAPER SINCE 1st JANURAY 2019

Online Publication Certificate will be provided to you on your registered mail ID.