A CHEF from Bangladesh who was offered £5,000 in compensation by the Home Office after it wrongly branded him a sex offender is facing deportation from Britain.

Saiful Islam, 44, has been fighting for 15 years to remain in Britain after his papers were incorrectly linked to three other people’s criminal records.

The Home Office has since apologised for the blunder but still wants to deport him to Bangladesh.

The chef, who lives in south Wales, came to Britain in 2004 on a work permit.

In 2005, he alerted police and the Home Office to his employer, whom he accused of exploitation, saying that his boss beat him and made him work 18-hour days.

Officials then ran Mr Islam’s file through national police checks and wrongly connected him with the files of three other people with convictions.

The Home Office subsequently curtailed his visa and threatened to remove him from Britain.

But this was unknown to Mr Islam until his file was finally released in 2018 by the Home Office, revealing he had been recorded as a sex offender, a crime he had not committed.

In 2019, the Home Office issued a full apology to Mr Islam, in an email which stated: “After investigating the issue it appears documents relating to three individuals were incorrectly placed on your paper file.”

But Mr Islam’s fight to remain in Britain did not end there. Last December, a hearing in the upper tribunal found that even though officials had made significant errors, Mr Islam was still not entitled to stay in Britain.

Judge Jackson ruled that he was not “required in any particular employment,” and therefore did not qualify for leave to remain.

Mr Islam is appealing the decision.

He told the Morning Star that the ordeal has taken a huge toll on his physical and mental health for which he now takes five different types of medication.

“I feel I lost everything in my life, because of Home Office scandal, employees’ misconduct of duty, and racial discrimination,” he said.

“I cannot sleep because of what has happened to me.”

A Home Office spokeswoman said: “We are unable to comment on ongoing legal proceedings.”