# If the one of editors acts as referee for a manuscript, the same pattern of reviewing process by an external scientist is adapted. # The comments are only medium of transmission to modify the script and they should never be hostile, inflammatory or derogatory style /language. # The reviewer comments should be only in the direction of improving the readability of manuscript, adept to international scientific script style. The manuscript is author's brain child and it should not be molded into any personalized frame. # The referees remarks in a classical tone that 'This work is not interesting', ' Similar studies were made earlier', It is not in frame of today's inter-disciplinary pursuit etc. are discouraged. # The critical comments should be annexed with earlier literature evidence, references to make things easier to the editors for final decision. The comments can even be categorized as 'Authors only', 'Editors only', 'Both for authors and editors'. # The reviewer should not use information in the manuscript for the benefit of himself/his school or organization. Also it should never be revealed to discredit anyone in the ladder. # The reviewer should not accept the manuscript, if his research group is on way of preparation of similar content or when under editorial processing in the same or any other journal. # The reviewer should not contact the author(s) by any communication means during the entire process. # The reviewer is to be immune in refereeing process to nationality/religion/political arena of origin of manuscript or even gender of author(s).