Market estimates are that nearly 400 companies have disappeared after mobilising money through public issues. These companies could have collected around Rs 1,200-1,500 crore from the public during the 1994-96 period. While many of these companies collected money through bogus stock invests, promoters also used private placements and promoters quota to lure public.

Many of the vanished companies are believed to be from Gujarat, Andhra Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh and Delhi. Dubious promoters were unable to list shares on the Bombay Stock Exchange as it had hiked the minimum equity capital for listing to Rs 10 crore from Rs 5 crore.

Despite the Sebi directive, stockexchanges are yet to finalise the list of vanished companies. The BSE has so far identified only 35 such companies. BSE president J C Parekh says that another 34 companies have not responded to the queries of the exchange. ``A BSE team will be visiting the places where these companies have given as addresses. We will finalise the report after this,'' Parekh said.

The Ahmedabad Stock Exchange (ASE) has found that 26 listed companies which had come out with issues worth Rs 157.64 crore since 1995-96 have simply `vanished' without creating any asset or recruiting any staff. ASE has prepared a list of another 182 companies which have raised an unspecified amount from the public but fell under `doubtful categories' for their failure to comply with norms fixed by Registrar of Companies (RoC) and Sebi.

However, several other regional stock exchanges have not made much headway in identifying the `vanished' companies. In fact, many of the merchant bankers who introduced these public issues in the market have alsoclosed down in the last two years. On top of this, there is no proper system to monitor the end-use of funds collected by companies. If 400 companies have disappeared without any assets or factory, an equal number is now existing only on paper.

SEBI, it is learnt, has asked for more powers to deal with such erring companies and promoters. However, a section of the market feels that the existing powers of the SEBI -- which is responsible for the orderly development of the capital market -- are enough to catch them. When contacted, SEBI senior executive director O P Gehrotra was not available for comments.

The confusion among the regulators has added to the confusion. SEBI had earlier sent a small list of such companies to the Department of Company Affairs (DCA) for necessary action. The latter has put tha ball back into the court of the SEBI. As an analyst pointed out, punishment will give investors the assurance of an effectively regulated market in future and also serve as deterrents for potentialoffenders. However, precious time is being wasted to punish the culprits.