Pramod Thomas is a senior correspondent with Asian Media Group since 2020, bringing 19 years of journalism experience across business, politics, sports, communities, and international relations. His career spans both traditional and digital media platforms, with eight years specifically focused on digital journalism. This blend of experience positions him well to navigate the evolving media landscape and deliver content across various formats. He has worked with national and international media organisations, giving him a broad perspective on global news trends and reporting standards.
BRITISH INDIANS who have travelled to India in recent weeks have spoken of the financial difficulties they face returning to the UK, as some find themselves unable to pay for quarantine fees.
Due to the growing number of cases of coronavirus in India and more than 130 cases of the Indian coronavirus variant being registered in the UK, the government added the country to its travel ban red list last month.
Those returning from India are now required to quarantine in a government-approved hotel.
Hotel quarantine costs £1,750 for one adult for 10 days. An extra adult or child over 11 in the same room is £650, and a child aged 5-11 is £325.
Due to the cost of hotel quarantine and increased flight prices, many British Asians have been left stranded with no way to get home.
Jayashree (Tina) Patel, from Wembley in north London, travelled to Ahmedabad after her younger brother Varun died from a heart attack on March 16. The beautician booked a return ticket to come back to the UK on April 30.
However, her flights were cancelled after India was added to England’s red list. The ticket booking agent has rebooked the journey for Saturday (8).
Patel, who lost her job as beauty salons have been closed since last year due to coronavirus, is considering how to return to the UK. She will have to pay a surcharge as her ticket has changed, as well as an additional £1,750 for 10 days of hotel quarantine and £300 for Covid-19 testing.
“I don’t have a job and I am now burdened with an extra £2,000,” she told Eastern Eye.
“(When my brother died), I had to borrow money from friends and acquaintances to go to India.”
Others have raised concerns on how the quarantine could potentially affect their employment in the UK.
Manish Barot
Fellow Londoner Manish Barot travelled to India recently, following the death of his father.
Barot was due to stay for four weeks and will return on May 15. On his return, he will have to isolate in a hotel - just 20-25 miles away from his family home in London.
Barot, a senior trading manager at Asda, has concerns on how the quarantine will affect his job.
“If I cannot go to work due to quarantine, I will not be able to claim leave pay,” he told Eastern Eye.
“As I’m handling the third rank responsibility in the superstore, the store management will also be affected in handling sales planning, staff holiday booking, day to day work, staff sick leave and other arrangements.”
Paresh Jadhav, from London, is in a similar predicament. He returned to India after his father passed away on April 13. Jadhav booked his return ticket for May 10 – but now has concerns on the cost of quarantine.
“If I quarantine, my firm can deduct my salary as there is no holiday left,” he explained. “But if I stay in India longer, there may be risks ranging from higher pay cuts to job loss.”
He added: “I’ve lost my father and now I must bear the new risk of incurring an additional £3,000 cost (for quarantine). But if I’m not home, there is a lot of extra responsibility on my wife Kinjal who is working full-time and also looking after our child.”
In response to Eastern Eye, a government spokesperson referred to a Department for Transport press notice on red listing which said: “British nationals currently in countries on the red list should make use of the commercial options available if they wish to return to England.
Commercial routes that will enable British and Irish nationals and residents to return to England continue to operate.”
If an individual is abroad and needs emergency help from the UK government, they should contact the nearest British embassy, consulate or high commission.
For more information on travel in India, see: https://www.gov.uk/foreign-travel-advice/india
MORE than 1,000 migrants arrived on small boats across the Channel on Shabana Mahmood’s first full day as home secretary, taking total arrivals this year past 30,000.
The Home Office said 1,097 migrants crossed on Saturday after nine days without any arrivals. It was the second-highest daily total this year, after 1,195 on May 31. Crossings have now reached 30,100 — 37 per cent higher than at this point in 2023 and 8 per cent higher than 2022, the record year.
Mahmood called the figures “utterly unacceptable” and said she would consider all options. She pledged the first deportations to France under the new one-in, one-out deal would begin “imminently”, with returns expected later this month.
Concerns remain that a possible collapse of the French government, with prime minister François Bayrou facing a confidence vote on Monday, could delay returns and a new maritime law allowing French police to intercept boats in the Channel, The Times reported.
The 30,000 mark has been reached earlier this year than any other since records began in 2018. It was reached on September 21 in 2022, October 30 last year, and not at all in 2023.
Mahmood, appointed home secretary after Angela Rayner’s resignation, is expected to outline plans to move asylum seekers from hotels into military sites.
Chris Philp, the shadow home secretary, said: “Reshuffling ministerial deckchairs does not change the obvious fact Labour has totally lost control of our borders.”
By clicking the 'Subscribe’, you agree to receive our newsletter, marketing communications and industry
partners/sponsors sharing promotional product information via email and print communication from Garavi Gujarat
Publications Ltd and subsidiaries. You have the right to withdraw your consent at any time by clicking the
unsubscribe link in our emails. We will use your email address to personalize our communications and send you
relevant offers. Your data will be stored up to 30 days after unsubscribing.
Contact us at data@amg.biz to see how we manage and store your data.
Demonstrators gather at the entrance of the parliament during a protest against corruption and government’s decision to block several social media platforms, in Kathmandu, Nepal September 8, 2025. (Photo: Reuters)
Thousands of young Nepalis march in Kathmandu against social media ban and corruption
Government blocks 26 unregistered platforms, citing fake news and fraud concerns
Police use tear gas, rubber bullets and water cannons to disperse protesters
Critics accuse government of authoritarianism and failure to deliver on promises
THOUSANDS of young Nepalis marched in Kathmandu on Monday demanding that the government lift its ban on social media platforms and address corruption.
Nepal blocked access to 26 unregistered platforms, including Facebook, YouTube, and X, on Friday. Popular platforms such as Instagram have millions of users in the country who rely on them for entertainment, news, and business. Authorities said the shutdown followed a Supreme Court order from September last year, which required companies to register in Nepal, appoint grievance officers, and establish local compliance.
The government said social media users with fake IDs had been spreading hate speech, fake news, and committing fraud. In a statement on Sunday, it said it respected freedom of thought and expression and was committed to "creating an environment for their protection and unfettered use".
Many demonstrators carried national flags and placards reading "Shut down corruption and not social media", "Unban social media", and "Youths against corruption". They began their rally with the national anthem before marching through the city.
"We were triggered by the social media ban but that is not the only reason we are gathered here," said student Yujan Rajbhandari, 24. "We are protesting against corruption that has been institutionalised in Nepal."
Another student, Ikshama Tumrok, 20, said she opposed the "authoritarian attitude" of the government. "We want to see change. Others have endured this, but it has to end with our generation," she said.
Protester Bhumika Bharati added: "There have been movements abroad against corruption and they (the government) are afraid that might happen here as well."
Since the ban, TikTok — still operational in Nepal — has carried viral videos comparing the lives of ordinary citizens with those of politicians’ children showing off luxury goods and vacations.
On Monday, thousands of youths, including students in school uniforms, tried to march to parliament but were stopped by police who had set up barbed wire barricades. Authorities said demonstrators attempted to break into parliament by pushing through police lines.
Police used tear gas, rubber bullets, water cannons and batons to disperse the crowds, officials said. "We have imposed a curfew which will remain in force until 10 pm local time (1615 GMT) to bring the situation under control after protesters began to turn violent," said Muktiram Rijal, spokesperson for the Kathmandu district office.
Nepal has restricted social media platforms before. The Telegram messaging app was blocked in July over fraud and money laundering concerns, and TikTok was banned for nine months before being restored in August last year when it complied with local rules.
Many Nepalis believe corruption is widespread, and prime minister KP Sharma Oli’s government has been criticised by opponents for failing to deliver on its promises. About 90 per cent of Nepal’s 30 million people use the internet.
The protests come as governments worldwide, including the US, EU, Brazil, India, China and Australia, have been tightening oversight of social media and Big Tech, citing concerns over misinformation, privacy, online harm and security. Critics warn that such measures risk limiting free expression, while regulators argue that stricter controls are needed.
(With inputs from agencies)
Keep ReadingShow less
People try to board a migrant dinghy into the English Channel on August 25, 2025 in Gravelines, France. (Photo: Getty Images)
THE UK government said on Sunday it is examining the use of military sites to house migrants, amid growing criticism over the practice of accommodating asylum seekers in hotels.
"We are looking at the potential use of military and non-military use sites for temporary accommodation for the people who come across on these small boats," defence secretary John Healey told Sky News.
Home secretary Shabana Mahmood said in a statement that migrants using boats to cross the Channel from France was "utterly unacceptable".
According to figures published Sunday by the Home Office, more than 30,000 people have arrived in Britain by boat since the start of the year.
Mahmood also said a new deal with France, which came into effect in early August, would allow Britain to detain those arriving by boat and return them to France.
The arrangement requires Britain to accept an equal number of eligible migrants from France.
Some hotels currently used to house migrants have seen protests, and the government is also facing legal challenges. By law, asylum seekers must be provided with accommodation and access to health care.
Prime minister Keir Starmer has pledged to end the use of hotels within four years. The government has already reduced the number of hotel places by half compared to a year ago.
The previous Conservative government had already prepared two disused military bases to house several hundred asylum seekers, a measure criticised by migrant-aid groups.
(With inputs from agencies)
Keep ReadingShow less
London Underground services will not resume before 8am on Friday September 12. (Photo: Getty Images)
First London Underground strike since March 2023 begins
RMT members stage five-day walkout after pay talks collapse
Union demands 32-hour week; TfL offers 3.4 per cent rise
Elizabeth line and Overground to run but face heavy demand
THE FIRST London Underground strike since March 2023 has begun, with a five-day walkout over pay and conditions.
Members of the Rail, Maritime and Transport (RMT) union are staging rolling strikes after nine months of negotiations failed.
The union has demanded a 32-hour week, while Transport for London (TfL) has offered a 3.4 per cent pay rise.
TfL said the offer was “fair” but added that a reduction from the contractual 35-hour week “is neither practical nor affordable,” BBC reported.
The strike runs from midnight on Sunday 7 September until 11.59pm on Thursday 11 September. London Underground services will not resume before 8am on Friday 12 September.
Nick Dent, director of customer operations at London Underground, said it was not too late to call off the strikes before disruption.
The Elizabeth line and London Overground will run as normal but are expected to be much busier. Buses and roads are also likely to see heavier demand.
A separate dispute will shut the Docklands Light Railway (DLR) on Tuesday 9 and Thursday 11 September.
Service plans include: limited Tube operations ending early on Sunday 7 September; little or no service on the Underground from Monday to Thursday; and full resumption by late morning on Friday 12 September. The Elizabeth line will not stop at Liverpool Street, Farringdon and Tottenham Court Road stations at certain times on 8–11 September, Sky News reported.
The last full Tube strike took place in March 2023.
Keep ReadingShow less
Mumbai Local has been stripped of its licence by Harrow council. (Photo: LDRS/Google Maps)
AN INDIAN restaurant in north London has lost its licence after it was found to have repeatedly employed illegal workers.
Harrow council determined that the evidence suggested that using illegal workers was a “systemic approach” to running the premises and it had a “lack of trust” in the business to comply with the law.
Harrow council’s Licensing Panel chose to strip Mumbai Local, an Indian restaurant on Streatfield Road, of its licence at a meeting on August 20, the outcome of which has now been made public.
The review came after Immigration Officers found people working there illegally on three separate visits dating back to 2023.
The panel found that the restaurant owner had “disregarded the law” on employing illegal workers on a number of occasions and it “had no trust” in them to remedy the situation.
An option to simply suspend the licence was considered but the panel concluded that it had “no confidence” in the licence holder’s ability to comply with their legal obligations and had “no choice” but to revoke it entirely.
The Home Office had called on Harrow council to review Mumbai Local’s licence due to a “continual pattern” of hiring illegal workers.
Immigration Officers told the panel that six illegal workers had been found at the restaurant following a visit on November 16, 2023, with a further two found during a follow up visit on July 4, 2024.
A compliance check was carried out on July 17, 2025, where a man who had previously been arrested was present on the premises, as well as another lady who told officers she would get the manager before disappearing.
On August 15, 2024, the company running the restaurant was given a £120,000 civil penalty for employing two people who did not have the right to work. This was reduced to £60,000 for employing one illegal worker following an appeal. A further appeal has been lodged but this remains ongoing.
The premises licence holder (PLH) “held their hands up” to the illegal workers being on the premises in November 2023, according to the meeting minutes, but claimed that the July 2024 incident “had more to it”. The PLH claims this worker came to the country having been sponsored by an IT company that went bust so he was out of work. They suggested the man is “like a son” to them and provided free food to him as he had nowhere to go and believes he “has a duty towards him”.
The PLH tried to suggest that the panel suspend the licence for just one month, claiming this would already “be crippling” to the business but the panel would “never see him again” as they had no other sanctions against them. However, under questioning the PLH admitted that there had been issues at another premises they own and they were forced to pay a £30,000 fine.
Ultimately, the panel didn’t feel the option of a suspension and additional conditions imposed on the licence “would be an appropriate remedy”. It determined that it “did not have the confidence in the PLH’s ability to comply with his legal obligations and had no option but to use their powers to revoke the licence.”