Incorrect result communication creates no enforceable right when the official corrected result has already been published.

An incorrect result list circulated by email and on social media did not create any enforceable right where the official website had already reflected the corrected result approved by the Examination Committee. The Court noted that moderation was limited to 13 marks and that the higher paper-wise moderation shown in the erroneous internal communication had not been sanctioned. A mistaken communication, not amounting to an official declaration, could not confer legal entitlement on the appellants. The challenge to the official result therefore failed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appellants could claim a right to be declared successful on the basis of an incorrect result list circulated by email and on social media, despite the official website reflecting the corrected result based on the Examination Committee's decision.

Analysis: The moderation adopted by the Examination Committee was restricted to 13 marks, and the higher paper-wise moderation reflected in the erroneous email list was not approved. The correct result had already been uploaded on the official website before the incorrect email was sent, and the mistaken internal communication was neither an official declaration nor a source of enforceable entitlement. An error in communication could not create any legal right in favour of the appellants.

Conclusion: The appellants had no enforceable claim based on the incorrect list, and the challenge to the official result failed.

---