AN Indian restaurant in Tiverton has lost the ability to sell its customers alcohol as part of a Home Office crackdown on the premises over illegal workers.

Mumbai Kitchen had been accused of employing illegal workers by the Home Office, which had then sought to revoke its alcohol licence.

Members of Mid Devon District Council’s licensing committee heard immigration officials had visited the restaurant in 2022, 2024, and last month, on each occasion finding one individual or more who did not have the correct paperwork to allow them to work at the curry house.

The licensee, Joy Abraham, attended the hearing but outlined that he had handed day-to-day responsibility for licensing to Jamal Uddin Ahmed, while a third individual, Maroof Ahmed, has been named in official documents as the restaurant manager or business owner.

The committee heard Jamal Uddin Ahmed was currently in Bangladesh, while Maroof Ahmed said after the hearing that the restaurant would still be trading and was not closed.

Mr Abraham, who is the landlord of the building from which Maroof Ahmed operates his restaurant, apologised for the situation but said he had only been notified of the issues surrounding the right to work for Mumbai Kitchen’s staff when the Home Office submitted its bid to revoke the premise’s alcohol licence in September, and that was why he had not acted to rectify the issues sooner.

That move by the Home Office prompted the involvement of the council as the licensing authority, which then was obliged to contact the licensee, Mr Abraham, who confirmed the Home Office had not contacted him in 2022 or 2024.

A decision was taken by the committee to revoke the alcohol licence at Mumbai Kitchen, although there is an opportunity for the licensee to appeal.

The committee heard that a Home Office visit to the restaurant on November 16 revealed three people were working illegally, prompting immigration officials to apply for an illegal working compliance order, which was granted by South and West Devon Magistrates Court on November 17, and Mid Devon District Council was notified the following day.

Such an order means immigration officials will visit the restaurant bi-monthly for a year.

Fiona Hinds, a solicitor from Everys Solicitors, said her client, Mr Abraham, “recognised the significant and serious failing in the way the business has been run”.

“He has taken steps to rectify this,” she said.

Ms Hinds added that Mr Abraham was in the process of identifying a third party that could conduct right to work checks on staff at the restaurant, and claimed such a structure would be a requirement for his tenant.

“The only sensible way is to make sure someone with proper training oversees this,” Ms Hinds added.

“Maroof is a gregarious and good restaurant owner, but grasping compliance isn’t his strong suit. That role has to go to a third party.”

The committee heard that one person’s working status had been accepted in the 2024 Home Office visit but that the circumstances of that individual had changed in the intervening period.

But Gary Fairnan, from the Home Office, said: “One worker there from last year had the right to work for 20 hours a week, but for his sponsor, or within the area he lives, which is East London.”

He added: “Working in Tiverton is not the role he has got the visa for.”

Mr Fairnan earlier told the committee the ability to work illegally was “a key driver of illegal migration” and that it encouraged the breaking of UK laws and was a practical means to remain here.

Councillor Les Cruwys (Liberal Democrat, Tiverton Cranmore), a member of the licensing committee, suggested the way the business was run meant “the ones on top don’t know what the others are doing or who is doing what”.

“After the 2022 raid, there was no action as everyone thought someone else was dealing with it,” he said.

“The Home Office wouldn’t have pushed it to this point, but they have got there as this is not a one-off, but a repeated issue.

“The future looks good [in terms of Mr Abraham’s proposed actions], the plan looks good, but the past doesn’t.”

Ms Hinds added that if Mr Abraham had known about the previous Home Office visits, “we wouldn’t be here”.

“Mr Abraham didn’t know about it and the business should have told him,” she added.

“Those are definite failures but the reality is until this application [to revoke the alcohol licence] came in, Mr Abraham didn’t know [about the issues] and he is very apologetic for that.”

Ms Hinds said Mr Abraham did not want to comment about whether he would appeal.

The committee did hear Mr Abraham was planning to secure a personal licence and was working through modules towards that goal.