Biometrics can be used to access devices that are near you and you hold in your hand. With the physical proximity, it is an added factor for devices that are supposed to be used by a specific user (hand held device, or a physical cases like door access where there is some supervision that the person indeed puts their fingers or eyes for reading).

Adding bio to other factors (like password and device producing one-time passwords) are good. For remote uses one has to make sure to carefully and secure encrypt the biometrics based information (and maybe combine it with other factors) since otherwise the signals can be read and re-used if available on the clear.

To summarize: one can use bio information in scenarios where there is proximity, or supervision, or in conjunction with other factors, and in a mode protected when communicated to a remote checking apparatus. In many other scenarios there are problems with biometrics information (copying fingerprints and embedding them in what is known as "gummy fingers" was one way that was shown to bypass biometrics-- so care is needed, see: https://cryptome.org/gummy.htm).

Thanks @Moti Yung for the valuable comments.

Yes of course. The biometrics are considered as an additional factor. In fact, 2FA is a special kind of  MFA

Thanks @Abdeljebar for the valuable comments.

I also consider two-factor-authentication as a proper subset of multi-factor-authentication. Generally, the more factors you employ for authentication the better. You need at least three-factor-authentication for the amalgamation of a knowledge factor (e.g. password), of a possession factor (e.g. a token generator), and of an inherence factor (e.g. biometric minutiae).

Biometric 2FA is a good option

Dear Itrit Waqas

Thanks for your answer

Dear Waqas

You are welcome