• Reviewers should respond within stipulated time frame, which is one week for the journal.
• Reviewers should try to fill in all the parts of reviewers report so that a fair judgment regarding the quality of the paper can be made
• As review is essential step towards publication process, every reviewer is therefore supposed to be fair in reviewing.
• Any reviewer who feels him/herself as unqualified, or not having judgment idea or deficit of time should inform editor promptly, so that the paper can be forwarded elsewhere.
• The review should be objective one, and personal feelings, judgments or biasness should not affect the review and its outcomes.
• A reviewer should not review a paper that discusses any point that might have conflict of opinion with reviewer.
• No manuscript should be reviewed which is authored, co-authored or authored by some known person/s, in order to avoid biasness.
• A manuscript sent for review is confidential document, so it should be treated fairly and secretary and should not be shown somewhere else.
• Reviewers should comment on each point clearly so that the judgment regarding acceptance/rejection or changes may be made on the basis of review.
• If reviewer notices any similarity with any other paper published in any other journal, containing same contents and that issued should be addressed to editor.
• While reviewing the paper the reviewer must ensure the following key points 

              - Originality of the Work, 
              - Contribution to field of technical quality of research
              - Clarity of presentation and dept of research