Author Appeals Policy

Kashmir Journal of Academic Research and Development (KJARD)

At KJARD, we uphold a transparent, impartial, and rigorous peer review process. We recognize that authors may occasionally disagree with editorial decisions and may have valid reasons to request reconsideration. This policy provides authors with a structured, fair, and ethical pathway to appeal decisions while maintaining the journal’s academic integrity and publication standards.

1. Valid Grounds for Appeal

Authors may submit a formal appeal if they believe:

  • The decision was based on a substantial misunderstanding or misinterpretation of the manuscript’s content or data.

  • Factual inaccuracies in reviewer feedback or editorial handling may have influenced the outcome.

  • Evidence suggests a conflict of interest, reviewer/editorial bias, or breach of ethical standards.

 Appeals must be evidence-based. Appeals based solely on disagreement with reviewer opinions, without clear justification, are unlikely to be considered.

2. Submitting an Appeal

Timeframe

  • Appeals must be submitted within 20 calendar days of receiving the decision notification.

  • Appeals received after this window may not be considered unless exceptional circumstances apply.

Formal Written Appeal

  • Appeals must be addressed to the Editor-in-Chief via the journal’s official contact system.

  • The appeal letter must:

    • Clearly state the reason for the appeal.

    • Identify specific factual errors or ethical concerns.

    • Respond to key reviewer/editor comments where applicable.

    • Include supporting evidence (clarifications, additional data, or documentation).

Revised Manuscript (Optional)

  • If relevant, authors may provide:

    • A marked-up version of the manuscript showing proposed changes.

    • A detailed response document explaining how reviewer/editor concerns have been addressed.

3. Appeal Review Process

Initial Editorial Assessment

  • The Editor-in-Chief will review the appeal alongside the original manuscript and decision record.

  • Input may be sought from the handling editor or senior editorial advisors to assess validity.

Additional Review (If Required)
The Editor-in-Chief may:

  • Refer the case back to the original reviewers (with author responses).

  • Assign the manuscript to new, independent reviewers unconnected to the initial review.

  • Request an internal review by a neutral editorial board member.

Final Editorial Decision

  • A final decision will be made based on review findings and journal policy. Possible outcomes include:

    • Upholding the original rejection.

    • Inviting revision and resubmission.

    • Accepting the manuscript (with or without further changes).

  • Authors will receive a written explanation of the final outcome.

4. Appeal Limitations

  • Only one appeal per manuscript is permitted.

  • Appeals are evaluated solely on merit and adherence to journal standards.

  • Repeated, unsubstantiated, or argumentative appeals will not be considered.

5. Ethical Considerations

  • If an appeal raises concerns of ethical misconduct (e.g., reviewer bias, undisclosed conflicts of interest, or procedural irregularities), the matter will be escalated to the Editorial Ethics Committee.

  • Corrective actions may include:

    • Reassigning the manuscript to a new editor or review panel.

    • Launching a formal investigation in line with COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics) guidelines.

6. Communication and Timeline

  • Acknowledgment: Authors will receive confirmation of appeal receipt within 5 business days.

  • Review Period: Appeals are typically resolved within 4–8 weeks, depending on complexity.

 This framework ensures that appeals are handled fairly, transparently, and consistently, while upholding the scholarly standards of KJARD.