To comply with this requirement, please ensure the following when submitting to the journal: Submit the Title Page containing the Authors’ details and a Blinded Manuscript with no author details included as 2 separate files.

The authors must read the detailed guidelines regarding submission before submitting the manuscript. As part of the submission process, authors are required to check off their submission's compliance with all of the following items, and submissions may be returned to authors that do not adhere to these guidelines.

  • The submission has not been previously published nor is it before another journal for consideration (or an explanation has been provided in comments to the editor)
  • the submission file is in Microsoft Word or RTF document file format.
  • Whereever available, URLs for the references have been provided.
  • The text is single spaced; uses a 12-white font; employs ilatics, rather than underlining; and all illustrations, figures and tables are placed within the text at the appropriate points rather than at the end.
  • The text adheres to the stylistic and bibliographic requirements outlined by the journal



All the manuscripts submitted to JELLL undergo a peer-review process. Peer review process involves the constructive feedback on the manuscript by experts to improve its quality. The reviewers must keep in view following guidelines while reviewing a manuscript:

  1. Quality of a Manuscript: The reviewer is expected to evaluate a manuscript while keeping in mind its originality, contribution to field of knowledge, technical quality, clarity of presentation and depth of the research problem. However, any comment made on the quality of manuscript must be relevant, brief and based on valid academic or technical grounds. Personal criticism must be avoided during the review process. The reviewer should not review it for rewriting it in his/her own preferred style, if a manuscript is basically sound and clear.
  2. Confidentiality of Manuscript: The manuscript sent to a reviewer is an unpublished work of the researcher so it should be ensured that the review process is confidential. Reviewer should not share any information about the manuscript with any other party. Details of the manuscript and the review process must be kept confidential after the review process is completed.
  3. Conflict of Interest: Conflict of interest refers to a situation in which the personal or professional interests of reviewer actually or potentially affects his/her task of review process. A reviewer, if finds himself/herself in a conflict of interest regarding a manuscript, must clearly declare it to the editorial board about his/her inability to review the manuscript. For instance, a reviewer, if receives a paper of his/her colleague or an intellectual opponent, must notify to the editorial board about it.
  4. Plagiarism/Violation of Copyright: A reviewer, if considers that a manuscript contains a plagiarism or might breach copyrights of another party, must immediately inform editorial board about it alongwith necessary evidence(s).
  5. Time Duration for Review Process: A reviewer is expected to complete the review process for a manuscript within a maximum period of two months. It will help the journal to provide timely feedback to the author.

All research articles published by the journal are subject to rigorous ethical standards. The journal endorses the Code of Conduct of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) as well as the COPE International Standards for Editors and Authors Guidelines. 

Editorship — The journal strongly supports the mission of the COPE Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors.

Authorship — All those who have made a valuable and significant contribution shall be given the chance to be cited as authors. Other individuals who have contributed to the work may also be acknowledged. Articles should include a full list of the current institutional affiliations of all authors, both academic and corporate.

Corrections and retractions - All authors are obliged to inform and co-operate with journal editors to provide prompt retractions or correction of errors in published works.