Source: S.R.O. 1774(I)/2026 — draft notification dated 30 September 2026 · Research date: 11 October 2026. Analysis is general information and should be read with the full instrument and subsequent amendments.
SECP’s draft S.R.O. 1774(I)/2026 targets the definition of “Registrar concerned”. The proposal is procedural in its immediate wording but potentially important for identifying the competent registration office or designated registrar.
The proposed amendment
The Securities and Exchange Commission of Pakistan has published draft S.R.O. 1774(I)/2026 under section 512 of the Companies Act, 2017. The instrument, dated 30 September 2026 and displayed in SECP’s recent publications on 9 October, proposes a single substitution in regulation 2(xxxvii) of the Companies Regulations, 2024. It does not purport to rewrite the incorporation, annual-return or post-incorporation filing regime generally.
The proposed definition of “Registrar concerned” refers, first, to the registrar in charge of the Company Registration Office within whose territorial jurisdiction the company’s registered office is located and, secondly, to a registrar designated by the Commission for a special class or category of companies at head office or at the relevant CRO.
Legal significance
The issue addressed is the identification of the competent registrar. A definition of this kind can affect where statutory applications, communications and registration decisions are administered, particularly where SECP has created specialist processing arrangements for a defined category of companies.
The text does not, on its face, transfer every company filing to a central registry, alter substantive eligibility requirements or announce new filing fees or deadlines. Those consequences should not be attributed to the proposal without a separate operative provision.
Chambers assessment
For routine companies, the link between the registered office and territorial CRO jurisdiction remains central. The additional reference to special designation recognises that jurisdiction over a class of companies may be administered by an authorised registrar outside that ordinary geographical allocation.
Corporate counsel should therefore distinguish the question of who may act as registrar from the separate question of which legal requirements govern the underlying filing or corporate action. A challenge to an administrative objection, for example, may require verification of the registrar’s designation and authority, not simply the registered office address.
Consultation and next steps
The draft provides that comments received within fourteen days of placement on the SECP website may be taken into consideration. Affected businesses and practitioners should verify the publication date and follow the regulator’s submission procedure if making representations.
Until a final amendment is notified, the proposed definition should be described as a consultation measure. The legal position for pending filings continues to depend upon the currently effective Companies Regulations and any relevant orders or delegations.
What should affected organisations do?
Monitor the final notified text and any accompanying designation orders. In the interim, do not revise company filing procedures solely on the strength of this draft.
Recommended action checklist
- Review draft S.R.O. 1774(I)/2026 against the current text of regulation 2(xxxvii).
- Check existing SECP designations affecting specialist companies where jurisdiction is material.
- Consider timely consultation comments within the stated 14-day window, calculated from confirmed website placement.
- Await formal notification before treating the proposal as operative law.
Timing and legal status
Consultation/draft stage. No operative date verified for this proposal.
Specific amendments have not been extracted or analysed in this prototype. No compliance change is represented as effective.
SECP — draft S.R.O. 1774(I)/2026 (PDF)