What is the relevance of the phrase "otherwise than in accordance with the provisions of Article 233 or Article 235" in relation to the appointment of district judges made before the commencement of the Twentieth Amendment Act, 1966?
The phrase "otherwise than in accordance with the provisions of Article 233 or Article 235" is relevant to the appointment of district judges made before the commencement of the Twentieth Amendment Act, 1966. It establishes that such appointments should not be considered illegal or void if they were made without adhering to the provisions outlined in Article 233 or Article 235. This implies that those appointed as district judges prior to this act being enforced are still considered valid and legal, despite any discrepancies in their appointment process.