Publication Policy:

i) As per our norms only maximum 5 authors will be allowed for single paper publication. Our charges include only 5 authors per single paper publication.
ii) if author want to add more than 5 authors then author have to pay 200 Rs additional charges per additional author. Author have to inform to IJSDR Team regarding number of authors before the paper published.
iii) We will NOT provide Hardcopy of the certificate and published research paper
iv) Once the paper published successfully then IJESAT NOT accept any request related to changes of Research paper content, Authors Details.
v) The manuscript submitted is author’s own original work; All authors participated in the work in a substantive way and are prepared to take public responsibility for the work;
vi) Corresponding (1st Author)Author was authorized by all authors to transfer all royalties related with the manuscript and to enter into a binding contract with IJESAT as detailed in this Copyright Release Form, and He/She will be responsible in the event of all disputes that have occurred and that may occur.
vii) The manuscript has not been published and is not being submitted or considered for publication elsewhere. The text, illustrations, and any other materials included in the manuscript do not infringe upon any existing copyright or other rights of anyone. Authors transfer all financial rights, especially processing, reproduction, representation, printing, distribution, and online transmittal, to IJESAT with no limitation whatsoever. If IJESAT found any copyright content or any issue related to copyright in future, then IJESAT have rights to withdraw the paper without prior notice to authors.
viii) REFUND POLICY: By default, ALL THE PAYMENTS ARE NON-REFUNDABLE. "No-shows" or “Extra-Page Payment” or “Excess Payment” or “Additional Payment” are not refundable and liable; and will be considered as the donations. But under the genuine consideration of refund request not later than 2 days prior to the Registration Closing date shall be processed with the applicable cancellation fee. All refund e-mail requests must be submitted to editor@ijesat.com. Request for refunds postmarked after the Registration Closing date will not be accepted.
ix) Changes to this Refund Policy - IJESAT has the discretion to update this refund policy at any time. When we do, we will revise the updated date at the bottom of this page. We encourage you to frequently check this page for any changes. You acknowledge and agree that it is your responsibility to review this refund policy periodically and become aware of modifications.

Privacy Policy

Users can browse and view www.ijesat.com website without providing any personal information. Third parties are not allowed to see users personal information unless otherwise approved by the users.  As per the principle of a journal, we never share or sell any personal data to anybody. We try to provide all possible cyber-security (possible by us) to protect all the information of the users. But the reality is that no website is 100% hacking proof. Therefore, IJESAT will not be responsible for any loss/theft of data, personal information, email ID, password, etc. and any kind of subsequent losses arising from these hacking, theft etc.

Publication of an article in the Journal Science Engineering Technology and Management Science is intrinsically an open process. Immediately after publication of a manuscript, the name and email addresses of corresponding authors will be available to website users with the sole purpose to facilitate scientific communication. Collecting these email addresses for commercial use is strictly prohibited.

EDITORIAL POLICY

The editor should give unbiased consideration to all manuscripts offered for publication, judging each on its merits without regard to race, gender, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the author(s). The editor has complete responsibility and authority to accept a submitted paper for publication or to reject it. The editor may confer with reviewers for an evaluation to use in making this decision. The editor and the editorial staff should not disclose any information about a manuscript under consideration to anyone other than reviewers and potential reviewers. The editor should respect the intellectual independence of authors.

The editor should avoid situations of real or perceived conflicts of interest. Such conflicts include, but are not limited to, handling papers from present and former students, from colleagues with whom the editor has recently collaborated, and from those in the same institution. Unpublished information, arguments, or interpretations disclosed in a submitted manuscript should not be used in an editor's own research except with the consent of the author. If the editor is presented with convincing evidence that the main substance or conclusions of a paper published in the journal are erroneous, the editor should facilitate publication of an appropriate paper pointing out the error and, if possible, correcting it.

REVIEWERS POLICY

The unpublished manuscript is a privileged document. Please protect it from any form of exploitation. Reviewers are expected not to cite a manuscript or refer to the work it describes before it has been published, and to refrain from using the information it contains for the advancement of their own research. A reviewer should consciously adopt a positive, impartial attitude towards the manuscript under review. Your position should be that of the author's ally, with the aim of promoting effective and accurate scientific communication. If you believe that you cannot judge a given article impartially, please return the manuscript immediately to the editor with that explanation.

A reviewer should not discuss a paper with its author/s. If you want to consult a colleague or junior please discuss this with us first. Please do not make any specific statement about the acceptability of a paper in your comments for transmission to the author, but advise the editor on a sheet provided. In your review, please consider the following aspects of the manuscript as far as they are applicable:

•  Scientific reliability
•  Importance of the question or subject studied
•  Originality
•  Adequacy of abstract, keywords.
•  Results relevant to a problem posed? Credible? Well presented?
•  Soundness of conclusions and interpretation.
•  Overall presentation (including writing style, clarity of writing)
•  In comments intended for the author's, criticism should be presented dispassionately, and abrasive remarks avoided.
•  Suggested revisions should be couched as such, and not expressed as conditions of acceptance. Please distinguish between revisions considered essential and those judged merely desirable.

Your criticism, arguments, and suggestions concerning that paper will be most useful to the editor if they are carefully documented. You are not requested to correct mistake/s in grammar, but any help in this regard will be appreciated. The editor gratefully receives a reviewer's recommendations, but since the editorial decisions are usually based on evaluations derived from several sources, a reviewer should not expect the editor to honor his or her every recommendation.

PEER REVIEW POLICY

Peer review is intended to improve the accuracy, clarity, and completeness of published manuscripts and to help editors decide which manuscripts to publish. Peer review does not guarantee manuscript quality and does not reliably detect scientific misconduct. Peer reviewers should be experts in the manuscript’s content area, research methods, or both; a critique of writing style alone is not sufficient. Peer reviewers should be selected based on their expertise and ability to provide high quality, constructive, and fair reviews. For research manuscripts, editors may, in addition, seek the opinion of a statistical reviewer. Peer reviewers advise editors on how a manuscript might be improved and on its priority for publication in that journal. Editors decide whether and under which conditions manuscripts are accepted for publication, assisted by reviewers’ advice.

Peer reviewers are sometimes paid for their efforts but usually provide their opinions free of charge, as a service to their profession. Editors should require all peer reviewers to disclose any conflicts of interest, financial or otherwise, related to a particular manuscript and should take this information into account when deciding how to use their review. Generally speaking, people with a direct financial interest in the results of the manuscripts should not be reviewers. To be considered peer-reviewed, a journal should have obtained external reviews for the majority of manuscripts it publishes, including all original research and review articles. Some editors request peer review for other kinds of articles, such as opinion pieces (commentaries/editorials) and correspondence. To have been peer-reviewed, a manuscript should have been reviewed by at least one external reviewer; it is typical to have two reviewers and sometimes more opinions are sought. Editors of peer-reviewed journals need not send all submitted manuscripts out for review. Manuscripts that seem unlikely to be published in that journal may be returned to authors without external review, to allow authors to submit the manuscript to another journal without delay and to make efficient use of reviewers’ and editors’ time.