Pankaj Agnihotri and Raj Kumar have cited certain key factors to be considered while appointing Presenting Officers. You have not shed any light on the circumstances that are compelling you to consider the option of making a clerk a presenting officer. However, the following guidelines may be of help.
1) Presenting the case and leading evidence on behalf of management before an enquiry officer, in my view, is an administrative function and cannot fall under the purview of any categories of functions referred to under Sec.2(s) of the Industrial Disputes Act, and hence, a clerk who is a workman cannot be entrusted with an administrative function.
2) Presenting is not an ordinary job but a huge responsibility. It requires a proper understanding of procedures and principles of natural justice, the ability to interpret the evidence, and apply it to the case to prove the delinquent guilty. For example, proving fraud needs a technical understanding of procedures and accounting principles, etc., to effectively prove guilt. Any improper presentation may prove costly, both to the employee or the employer. It all depends on the nature of misconduct and the status of the delinquent employee.
3) Government establishments and industrial establishments in the public sector have their own disciplinary rules and procedures defining every step in the disciplinary process, such as appointing Presenting Officers, Enquiry Officers, and defense representatives, etc. In respect to the private sector covered by Standing Orders, the certified Standing Orders will cover this issue. They need to follow them.
4) If the establishment's standing orders are silent, or it is one not covered by standing orders, or it is one that does not have any rules, such establishments may consider appointing any officer for presenting the case. Alternatively, if for any reason this is not possible, it may consider appointing an outsider like an ex-officer from a company acquainted with disciplinary matters, as a Presenting Officer.