Appearance of Advocate /Non Advocate in the hearing
Quick Reply: A Punjab SIC Full Bench settled five questions on who may argue your RTI hearing: any person — including a non-Advocate — may appear for an information-seeker, if the Commission authorises it; the representative may charge for the appearance; a formal Vakalatnama is not compulsory. The decision PDF is attached below.
In one line. Any person, including a person who is not an Advocate, may appear on behalf of an applicant or a Public Information Officer before an Information Commission, provided the Commission has authorised the appearance. The representative may charge a consideration.
What that means in practice.
- An applicant is not required to engage an Advocate to appear before the Commission.
- A non-Advocate representative must obtain the Commission's authorisation; a formal Vakalatnama is not required, but a written authorisation is ordinarily expected.
- A Public Information Officer may also be represented by an Advocate or a departmental officer.
- The decision is of the Punjab State Information Commission, Full Bench. It has persuasive value before the Central Information Commission and other State Commissions.
In an order of the Full Bench of the Punjab State Information Commission, which deliberated and decided the following issues:
- Whether a person not registered as an Advocate can appear on behalf of an information-seeker before the Commission.
- Whether a person not registered as an Advocate and not holding a pleader’s license can appear on behalf of an information-seeker in the Commission and plead on his behalf in the proceedings under Sections 18 and 19 of the Right to Information Act, 2005.
- Whether such a non-Advocate can appear after charging certain consideration from the concerned information seeker.
- Whether there should be a specific format of Vakalatnama/authorization which must be submitted by non-Advocate representing an information-seeker before the Commission.
- Whether a formal Order needs to be passed by the Commission in each case permitting such non-Advocate to represent an information-seeker, before such individual can be allowed to appear or plead on behalf of the information seeker.
Decision of the Commission
- Any person (even non advocate) can appear on behalf of information seeker
- Appearance has to be authorised by the Commission
- Person appearing can charge consideration for his/her appearance
- PIO can be represented by Advocate
- Any party can be represented by an Advocate
The decision is available here: Download Decision
Getting your representative allowed — the practical sequence
1. **Name the representative in writing** — a simple signed authorisation from the appellant; the Full Bench treats a formal Vakalatnama as unnecessary, but the authorisation should be on record. 2. **Ask the Commission's leave before the hearing starts** — appearance is permitted "provided the Commission authorises it", so move the application first, not after objection. 3. **PIO side has the same latitude** — a departmental officer or an Advocate may represent the PIO; expect the hearing to proceed on records either way. 4. **Fees charged by a non-Advocate are not illegal** under this ruling — agree them beforehand, in writing.
FAQs
Does this apply outside Punjab?
The ruling is a State Commission's Full Bench decision — persuasive, not binding, elsewhere; the CIC has its own practice on representatives. File the authorisation regardless; it removes the objection everywhere.
Is a lawyer ever required?
No — RTI proceedings are not court litigation; the record and the law carry the appeal. A representative helps when you cannot attend or the case is heavy with documents.
What should the authorisation say?
Name of appellant, name of representative, appeal/complaint number, and the act being authorised — appearance and arguments on the appellant's behalf — signed by both.