Yes, they passed him on the way up but that doesn't mean there wasn't still a risk in bringing the man down. I assume he's not able to move under his own power. A lot more energy is expended if you have to drag/carry a 200-lb man down to the base camp (not to mention the oxygen given him) than the simple act of moving just your own weight up and down the mountain.
It makes it seem more criminal to pass him on the way up but I don't know with certainty that abandoning the climb and rescuing the man would be accomplished without significant danger to others.
Again, I'm not defending the climbers as much as saying that there could be legitimate reasons not to attempt a rescue.
Which is to say, you're defending them.
Sorry, but there's simply no excuse to leave a guy for dead on the way uphill. The key words are "far less professional climbing party," which is tantamount to saying, "he deserved it." The tacit expectation would be that a similar problem -- say, with our double amputee friend -- would have resulted in a rescue attempt.
My wife and I were discussing this, and she reminded me that we saw Mr. Inglis's story on "I shouldn't be Alive" just a month or two back.
It was the story of how he lost his legs.
It also featured how his companion, who he had met a day or two earlier, struggled heroically to save his life.
What irony. Inglis came across as a a$$hole of gigantic proportions on that show. I guess they featured him accurately.
Watch the show if you have a chance, I'll wager you serious money that you'll have a change of heart about your position on this.